[Mr_White]

You forgot taqlid shakhsi of the Salafi madhab, i.e. Albani, Uthaymeen, Bin Baz etc.

Some days ago our Mufti Sahab was saying this. Salafis/Ahle Hadiths are the greatest muqallids!

[antiggill]

I think that won't lead to any contradiction. There has never been that staunch sort of the Taqleed among the Hanabilah. The strict form of Taqleed is primarily propagated by the Hanafis who while making arguments for Taqleed love to talk for the rest of the three Madhahibs in a way as if the rest of the three are in a perfect agreement with them.

I was reading the footnotes of Abdullah bin Hamid Ali's translation of Ibn Jawzi's book, Daf' shubah at-tashbih bi-akaff al-tanzih where it was mentioned that taqlid in fiqh is compulsory on everyone who doesn't fulfill the conditions of a Mujtahid Mutlaq. Then it went on to mention the view of the majority of Ulamaa' that taqlid is impermissible in the area of Aqaa'id. Imam al-haramayn was then quoted from his Shamil "None have adopted the view that taqlid in creedal matters (usul) is permissible except for the Hanbalis."

There were other references given as well but that should do it.

So the picture isn't so rosy as you like to put it.

You might have some more reading to do so get to it.

[asSexate]

interesting response. Just to let you know Mufti Sajaads article has been responded to elsewhere, begins here.

The style of that response may not be palatable for everyone, so they might have to take a lesson from this before reading.

You know, if you're just going to regurgitate Harris Hammam's posts on IA, you might as well just stop posting here and just let anyone interested read it from him directly.

[asSexate]

I am amazed that 7 people voted "I believe Taqleed shakhsi is obligatory"

I voted for that option, even though I don't think any of the answers really represents the correct position (at least as according to my understanding) fully.

[brraverishhh]

Assalamu alaykum

I vote for the first option.

The reason; from the day (may be about 15 years back) I was invited towards rejection of taqleed-e-shakhsi,I have asked them, what is the alternative for taqleed-e-shakhsi? No convincing reply till now. Some times the reply leads to taqleed of a person who won't posses any knowledge.

[SoorgoBardy]

Quoting a sunniforum member on Taqleed:
"Life is short, Do Taqleed."

[intendepods]

Well I heard that Imam Ahmad was a muhaddith, and he didn't like people writing down anything besdies ahadith. However, when the mu'tazili fitnah occured, and our Imam was beaten, his popularity rised and students flocked to him. Some of his students disobeyed his command not to consign to writing his usul, after he passed away, and hence his madh-hab survived. Wa Llahu a'lam.

السلام عليكم

جازاك الله خيرا يا إبن سالم

[aburva.org]

You know, if you're just going to regurgitate Harris Hammam's posts on IA, you might as well just stop posting here and just let anyone interested read it from him directly.

By now it should quite clear that -Hussain- is another of those (as abul-hussain) who although describe themselves as "Hanafi-Deobandi" here on SF, they are neither of them, and do so just in order to deceive people and trying to confuse Deobandi laymen and pushing them towards Salafi ideas "explaining" them what the Akabir's stances really (according to them) were.

If I was a mod...

[socialkiiii]

Brother Umar I would highly recommend you to lay down your suspicions. There are many Deobandis with Salafi inclinations, some more extreme than others.

[aburva.org]

Brother Umar I would highly recommend you to lay down your suspicions. There are many Deobandis with Salafi inclinations, some more extreme than others.

for your advice brother.

But I base my suspicions on my observation; I know about the phenomenon of Salafi-like Barelwi-bashing-obsessed zealous "Deobandi" laymen who don't really know the real Deobandi stances in many issues, but they don't link to IA/Harris Hammam's website.

And Allah knows best.

[borasolit]

You forgot taqlid shakhsi of the Salafi madhab, i.e. Albani, Uthaymeen, Bin Baz etc.

Thats not taqleed shakhsi.

I voted for number 4 as i am gradually getting convinced that Taqleed (or atleast Taqleed e Shakhsi) is the root of many problems.

Ulama like Shaykh Albani and Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen also agree that taqleed for lay people is necessary.

I would say Sufism is the root of many problems because of the level of blind obedience that comes with peer-mureed relationship. Taqleed is not really an issue if its kept within limits.

Since we're bringing up the Hanbali madhab it always confuses me, I read a couple of the sayings of Ahmad (rah) and he obviously was no fan of taqleed but how is it that he has a Madhab and a Muqallideen then???

Scholars and students are not associated with a madhab on the basis of taqleed, rather they are affiliated to the madhab because of its principles as dr.ati explained.

So if a layperson wants to be 'Hanbali' on the taqleed issue, he does general unrestricted taqleed of any imam.

taqlid in fiqh is compulsory on everyone who doesn't fulfill the conditions of a Mujtahid Mutlaq.

Do you agree there are different levels of ijtihad?
If yes, then how can one do ijtihad and taqleed in the same issue at the same time?

Are you sure you quoted that correctly?

You know, if you're just going to regurgitate Harris Hammam's posts on IA, you might as well just stop posting here and just let anyone interested read it from him directly.

What was the point of your post exactly when I did post a direct link to his posts where people can read.

[borasolit]

By now it should quite clear that -Hussain- is another of those (as abul-hussain) who although describe themselves as "Hanafi-Deobandi" here on SF, they are neither of them, and do so just in order to deceive people and trying to confuse Deobandi laymen and pushing them towards Salafi ideas "explaining" them what the Akabir's stances really (according to them) were.

If I was a mod...

I never claimed to be Deobandi.

But do you believe that the elders of Deoband although sincere can be genuinely mistaken on an issue? I've come across propaganda from Barelvis where they say Deobandis believe their elders are infallible and can never continue on mistakes- although that is exaggerated but I am still beginning to understand where they might have gotten the idea from!

[socialkiiii]

I never claimed to be Deobandi.

But do you believe that the Akabir although sincere be genuinely mistaken on an issue? I've come across propaganda from Barelvis where they say Deobandis believe their elders are infallible and can never continue on make mistakes- although that is exaggerated but I am still beginning to understand where they might have gotten the idea from!

I think you have it reversed. We do not idolize our akaabireen رحمهم الله . It is the Barelvis who do everything but make an idol and start worshiping their Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi.

[asSexate]

Thats not taqleed shakhsi.



Ulama like Shaykh Albani and Shaykh ibn Uthaymeen also agree that taqleed for lay people is necessary.

I would say Sufism is the root of many problems because of the level of blind obedience that comes with peer-mureed relationship. Taqleed is not really an issue if its kept within limits.



Scholars and students are not associated with a madhab on the basis of taqleed, rather they are affiliated to the madhab because of its principles as dr.ati explained.

So if a layperson wants to be 'Hanbali' on the taqleed issue, he does general unrestricted taqleed of any imam.




Do you agree there are different levels of ijtihad?
If yes, then how can one do ijtihad and taqleed in the same issue at the same time?

Are you sure you quoted that correctly?





What was the point of your post exactly when I did post a direct link to his posts where people can read.

I don't think we need a spokesperson for Harris Hammam here. All you do here is repeat his opinions, and now you even link to them directly.

If someone is so interested in his opinions, we all know where to find them.

[aburva.org]

I never claimed to be Deobandi.

You always try to force on Deobandis what the supposed "real" Deobandi stance is, every time trying to make it coincide with the Salafi stance.

But do you believe that the elders of Deoband although sincere can be genuinely mistaken on an issue? I've come across propaganda from Barelvis where they say Deobandis believe their elders are infallible and can never continue on mistakes- although that is exaggerated but I am still beginning to understand where they might have gotten the idea from!

What does this have to do with you trying to manipulate what the "real" Deobandi/Hanafi stance on a series of issues is?

[socialkiiii]

for your advice brother.

But I base my suspicions on my observation; I know about the phenomenon of Salafi-like Barelwi-bashing-obsessed zealous "Deobandi" laymen who don't really know the real Deobandi stances in many issues, but they don't link to IA/Harris Hammam's website.

And Allah knows best.

I hadn't seen the link to HH and now I agree with you.

[borasolit]

I don't think we need a spokesperson for Harris Hammam here. All you do here is repeat his opinions, and now you even link to them directly.

If someone is so interested in his opinions, we all know where to find them.

Because his posts are the ones that counter the Deobandi misconceptions. And you've also had people from other madhabs point it out a few times on this forum that the Deobandi position on taqleed doesnt exist everywhere, yet you just ignore it and still insist on being extremists saying the other is invalid.

[antiggill]

Do you agree there are different levels of ijtihad?
If yes, then how can one do ijtihad and taqleed in the same issue at the same time?

By making ijtihad in the subsidiary laws (within the madhhab) while making taqlid in usool (fundamental principles) of the madhhab. Here, you can even read up on it. Don't know how much you'll digest, though.

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...s-and-scholars

If you want others reference, check out the sharh 'uqood rasm al-mufti and the muqaddamah of rad al-muhtaar.

Are you sure you quoted that correctly?

Yup. Did you understand it correctly?

[asSexate]

Because his posts are the ones that counter the Deobandi misconceptions.

I think most of the users here would say that you and Harris Hammam are the ones with misconceptions. Again, the fact that you deem the Deobandi position a "misconception" shows that you don't accept it as valid, which makes your demand that we accept the validity of your opinion all the more curious.

And you've also had people from other madhabs point it out a few times on this forum that the Deobandi position on taqleed doesnt exist everywhere, yet you just ignore it and still insist on being extremists saying the other is invalid.

Your own poll is a good indication that your claim that we are extremists (a claim that is born from Harris Hammam's propaganda) is not well founded. As of the writing of this post, the numbers are almost equal between those who believe Taqleed Shakhsi as obligatory and those who believe Taqleed in general is obligatory.

[pipitous]

I would like to point out that Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah was never against Taqleed - rather he was against mainly being Ta'assub to a Madh-hab. Though he was a bit lax in Taqleed doesn't man he was against it, but one thing is for sure he clearly says the one not able to deduce will do Taqleed.

If i remember correctly he stilll calls the layperson acting upon the 'daleel' which he (the layperson) deems 'stronger', or 'better' for his Deen a Muqallid.