Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
![]() This post in particular is addressed to those who follow a madhhab, and more particularly to the followers of Hanafi School of thought. I address this both to the awam as well as the 'ulama. 1. Non-hanafi practice isn't automatically a Salafi practice. A lot of times, practices which are against the Hanafi school of thought are quickly labelled as a modern day Salafi practice. In reality, such practice may actually be the position of one of the other three schools. I am seeing as a growing problem that the Hanafis are very quick on labelling different practices as deviant practice just because it isn't from the Hanafi school of thought. 2. The injustice of making the madhhab issue an 'aqeedah issue. Often times, 'Ulama overlook the fact that the general public aren't taught what a madhhab is for all their lives. In most countries (personal experience), the concept of madhhab isn't defined in the islamic studies that are taught in schools; it isn't covered in masjid lectures, etc. So when the 'Ulama say that following and sticking to madhhab is wajib, they are just speaking for the first time of madhhab, without really educating the mass why that is so. This is more concerning when the 'Ulama are voicing strongly, that if you do not follow a madhhab you are basically treading your path to hell. It may be true, but if the matter is really that serious, the 'Ulama should ensure that the concept of madhhab is clear to every single individual from their childhood. 3. The dropping of the title that identifies you with a madhhab. The 'Ulama of the past had the title of their madhhab attached to their names. Such as Sheikh so and so ash-Shafi'i, or Imam so and so al-Maliki. That doesn't seem the case any more. While the 'Ulama are emphasising the importance of following one madhhab, they are not idenfying which madhhab they themselves follow. This is very important especially in western countries, where in one general lecture or QnA session, you have audience from all madhhabs present. Imagine what happens when a person goes to a conference/qna where a Salafi sheikh is giving answer. The Muqallid 'Ulama would strongly oppose it because it's risky that the audience might take a wrong ruling and apply to their lives and mess up an 'amal altogether. Same is possible in their own case as well. 4. Who speaks for the madhhab? This is probably not as much of a problem for Hanafis and Shafi'is, but more for Malikis and Hanbalis. Which scholar/book from the past/present expresses the official position of the madhhab? Sometimes it appears to be a question without a concrete answer. If that is really the case, then how does the madhhab prevent the followers from following their nafs by taking from the various opinions of the same madhhab? Wasn't that the whole point of madhhab to begin with? These are some of the points I think the 'Ulama should clarify, and the muqallid awam should be aware of. I may be wrong, and the above observations are only from personal experience over the years from being a muqallid to salafi to being a muqallid again. I am happy being a muqallid, and i think this is the best way; but i do think that certain questions need to be addressed well by the 'Ulama in order to bridge the gap in the understanding of madhhabs. Wallaahu A'lam. ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
|
To add to these lists, some of the hanafi 'ulamaa should not speak on what the mu'tamad is for other madhhaahib when their saying contradicts the mu'tamad/mashhoor of another madhhab.
Realize there is ikhtilaaf with regards to taqleed shakhsi. Tolerate the other side with respect. Also please refute the person's opinion and don't attack his character. |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
^ Bro, please check this thread: Please check it. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|