[hygtfrdes]

Abu Tamim,

Some scholars would argue that the Hadith implies one should keep a beard (whether wajib or mandub, let us leave that), and that:

1) Actions of Sahaba are not hujjah, and this is technically, more or less, a principle in Shafi´i Usul.

2) If it is to be taken as a hujjah (or at the very least at least a source of guidance), a Sahabi trimming his beard would only indicate that it is not impermissible to do so, and the specific length he trimmed it down to would not necessitate it being a defined limit as such, as there is no text expressing such. This is why you will find an Imam of the Shafi´i school like Al-Ghazali (rah) saying that keeping a short beard fulfills the Sunah of the beard.

We may agree or disagree.

wa'Allahu a´lam.

Rifai.
1) Actions of the Sahaba are a hujjah is our school.
2) This is where we have to disagree. Because we get nothing authentic from the Prophet about trimming the beard, yet we get it from Sahaba like Ibn `Umar, Abu Hurayra & Ibn 'Abbas as well as from many tabi'in. And practically everyone from the Khayr al Qur'oon talks about a fistful. Secondly the Hanafi school takes trimming to a fistful as the MAXIMUM that can be trimmed because we have nothing from the texts or the practice of the Salaf about a beard less than a fist.

[hygtfrdes]

Salaamu alaiykum
Are people still going to deny that this is not turning into a madhab-salafi debate? And on top of that, I feel as if I am the one who is actively engaging in it and causing it to grow? Abu Tamim, I was actually trying to look for the part where you would hopefully say: "And keeping the beard straight by cutting the sticking out parts is/ is not a sunnah" but I guess I was wrong. Please, if you want to turn this thread into a debate on fiqh and usool (which I have no idea what they even are let alone can speak on them, so please don't force me to involve myself - I just try and remain on a simple understanding, which is following the salaf-e-salih (now don't make that another source of debate)) then first answer whether it is allowed or not to straighten it - does it fall under keeping oneself look good according to sunnah, or not letting it grow?

See post 19 for your answer. Even talking calmly about something seems to be a war to you.

[GrileVege]

See post 19 for your answer. Even talking calmly about something seems to be a war to you.

Jazakallahu khaiyrun. Sorry. It's probably because I don't understand half the stuff you're saying and thus i think you guys are arguing lol.

[Esmeralfaf]

Rifai.
1) Actions of the Sahaba are a hujjah is our school.
2) This is where we have to disagree. Because we get nothing authentic from the Prophet about trimming the beard, yet we get it from Sahaba like Ibn `Umar, Abu Hurayra & Ibn 'Abbas as well as from many tabi'in. And practically everyone from the Khayr al Qur'oon talks about a fistful. Secondly the Hanafi school takes trimming to a fistful as the MAXIMUM that can be trimmed because we have nothing from the texts or the practice of the Salaf about a beard less than a fist.

Personally, the opinion that I convey to inquiring souls is always the mu´tamad, i.e. that it is makruh to take anything from the beard, even that which is above a fist length (except for on Hajj and Umrah). I was merely stating some arguments that the great Imams of this Ummah have employed when disagreeing with both "my" view and the standard Hanafi view. Imam Ghazali was a mujtahid and subsequent Fiqh works by various Imams of the school are basically based on his works.

wassalam

[Eujacwta]

To the original poster,
it may be better if you adopted a specific school of thought; this will give you confidence and peace of mind as you would feel content seeking your answer from a qualified scholar of the madhhab, as opposed to taking incomplete (and sometimes inaccurate) knowledge from Sunniforum.

As for trimming the beard, the Hanbali madhhab allows it.
See: http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/h/120.html

Wallaahu A'lam.

[Druspills]

Personally, the opinion that I convey to inquiring souls is always the mu´tamad, i.e. that it is makruh to take anything from the beard, even that which is above a fist length (except for on Hajj and Umrah). I was merely stating some arguments that the great Imams of this Ummah have employed when disagreeing with both "my" view and the standard Hanafi view. Imam Ghazali was a mujtahid and subsequent Fiqh works by various Imams of the school are basically based on his works.

wassalam

Imam Ghazzali never said a trimmed beard fulfills the sunnah. The proof of this is that he has mentioned that trimming the beard is makhruh. And a makhruh action can never be a sunnah. This is in Ihya Uloom al-Din and anyone who has it can read it. So unless you can bring a proof of your claim from some other source or some of his other books - then your claim regarding Imam Ghazzali is false.

[Druspills]

To the original poster,
it may be better if you adopted a specific school of thought; this will give you confidence and peace of mind as you would feel content seeking your answer from a qualified scholar of the madhhab, as opposed to taking incomplete (and sometimes inaccurate) knowledge from Sunniforum.

As for trimming the beard, the Hanbali madhhab allows it.
See: http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/h/120.html

Wallaahu A'lam.

Assalamu alaikum,

Brother, I have found that there two madhabs where it is difficult to find the mu'tamad - that is Hanbali and Maliki. There are different flavours of scholars in these madhabs and each claim to to be expressing the mu'tamad opinion.

For example there great differences between Moroccan and Mauritanian Malikis. There are also big differences between Syrian and Saudi Hanbalis. In both these madhabs on group will say beard cannot be trimmed and another will say beard can be trimmed.

Whereas in the Hanafi and Shafi' the mu'tamad is known by all scholars in most (not all) matters - i.e. there is more or less agreement. And if a scholar gives a different opinion they know they are digressing from the mu'tamad.

[Eujacwta]

Assalamu alaikum,

Brother, I have found that there two madhabs where it is difficult to find the mu'tamad - that is Hanbali and Maliki. There are different flavours of scholars in these madhabs and each claim to to be expressing the mu'tamad opinion.

For example there great differences between Moroccan and Mauritanian Malikis. There are also big differences between Syrian and Saudi Hanbalis. In both these madhabs on group will say beard cannot be trimmed and another will say beard can be trimmed.

Whereas in the Hanafi and Shafi' the mu'tamad is known by all scholars in most (not all) matters - i.e. there is more or less agreement. And if a scholar gives a different opinion they know they are digressing from the mu'tamad.

Is that the case for beard in the Hanbali madhhab?
Would you be able to guide us to a contrary fatwa to what's been posted from Sheikh Musa? (from non-salafi Hanbali sources)

[Druspills]

Is that the case for beard in the Hanbali madhhab?
Would you be able to guide us to a contrary fatwa to what's been posted from Sheikh Musa? (from non-salafi Hanbali sources)

Assalamua laikum,

You see brother that's the point. We cannot just disregard Salafi Hanbali ulema. The opinion they will give is that trimming is not permissible. And some of the Hanbali Saudis we are calling Salafi are not even Salafi - they are Hanbali.

And another point you bore out is that there isn't so many Hanbali ulema that we might actually know the truth. Apart from Sheikh Musa Furber who else can we quote?

For example when Saudis do masah on socks they are salafi, but when only Sheikh Musa Furber confirms its alright in the Hanbali madhab, then it becomes part of the Hanbali madhab. And the funny thing is Sheikh Mubarakpuri (who is very hardcore Salafi - and anti-Hanafi) he says that masah on cotton socks is not permissible.

So the issue of Hanabali fiqh is very obscure. Even with regards to Ibn Taymiyyah (rh) no one is really sure what his opinion is. Everyone quotes him to support themselves. Recently I even heard there is a book full of opinions where Ibn Taymiyyah and Abu Hanifa concur on countless issues.

Even with regards to Imam Ahmad, on one issue you have several narrations regarding his opinion. Different ulema give preference to different opinions.

Maliki fiqh - its more or less the same issue.

[giDdfezP]

Sh. Musa Ferber is now Shafi`i, isn't he?

And what about Sh. Asmari? He's Saudi, but from what I've heard he is a traditional Hanbali.

[GrileVege]

My thread is being derailed in front of my eyes despite my continual warning about not turning this into a debate... But what is it a debate about? A difference in opinion among scholars! Get over your differences guys! As long as you have your valid scholars! Let's talk about more serious differences like in 'aqeeda.
Shall we close this thread.

[Eujacwta]

My thread is being derailed in front of my eyes despite my continual warning about not turning this into a debate... But what is it a debate about? A difference in opinion among scholars! Get over your differences guys! As long as you have your valid scholars! Let's talk about more serious differences like in 'aqeeda.
Shall we close this thread.

dear brother,
I do not think anyone is arguing.
The nature of your question does require some back and forth discussion. There is no debate going on among the brothers.

Wallaahu A'lam.

[Eujacwta]

Assalamua laikum,

You see brother that's the point. We cannot just disregard Salafi Hanbali ulema. The opinion they will give is that trimming is not permissible. And some of the Hanbali Saudis we are calling Salafi are not even Salafi - they are Hanbali.

And another point you bore out is that there isn't so many Hanbali ulema that we might actually know the truth. Apart from Sheikh Musa Furber who else can we quote?

For example when Saudis do masah on socks they are salafi, but when only Sheikh Musa Furber confirms its alright in the Hanbali madhab, then it becomes part of the Hanbali madhab. And the funny thing is Sheikh Mubarakpuri (who is very hardcore Salafi - and anti-Hanafi) he says that masah on cotton socks is not permissible.

So the issue of Hanabali fiqh is very obscure. Even with regards to Ibn Taymiyyah (rh) no one is really sure what his opinion is. Everyone quotes him to support themselves. Recently I even heard there is a book full of opinions where Ibn Taymiyyah and Abu Hanifa concur on countless issues.

Even with regards to Imam Ahmad, on one issue you have several narrations regarding his opinion. Different ulema give preference to different opinions.

Maliki fiqh - its more or less the same issue.

InshaAllaah I will open a new thread to address a similar concern.

[AALee]

Assalamu alaikum,

Brother, I have found that there two madhabs where it is difficult to find the mu'tamad - that is Hanbali and Maliki. There are different flavours of scholars in these madhabs and each claim to to be expressing the mu'tamad opinion.

For example there great differences between Moroccan and Mauritanian Malikis. There are also big differences between Syrian and Saudi Hanbalis. In both these madhabs on group will say beard cannot be trimmed and another will say beard can be trimmed.

Whereas in the Hanafi and Shafi' the mu'tamad is known by all scholars in most (not all) matters - i.e. there is more or less agreement. And if a scholar gives a different opinion they know they are digressing from the mu'tamad.

Take out Deobandi scholarship and you will find that the same ambiguity exists amongst the Hanafi scholars.

[Druspills]

Take out Deobandi scholarship and you will find that the same ambiguity exists amongst the Hanafi scholars.

Assalamu aliakum brother,

I don't believe so. The Arabs and the Indians both primarily rely upon Ibn Abideen.

Can you please quote me one major example. Even regarding the beard the Arabs/SunniPath etc. admit that fist is wajib but they are making an outside the fiqh exception.

With regards to things like Asr time and and some other issues there are clearly two (or maybe more) distinct choices and all scholars believe in these distinct valid opinions.

The only issue that comes to my mind is pants below the ankle.

Even if you see Ascent to Felicity it is almost exactly in agreement with Indian books in 99% of the issues.

In general the Hanafi and Shafi fiqhs have well defined mu'tamad opinions. If scholars are quoting a non-mu'tamad opinion then they know they are quoting a non-mu'tamad opinion. In fact finding the mu'tamad opinion in the Shafi' fiqh is more easy and more easily ascertained compared to the Hanafi fiqh.

[Eujacwta]

Please see: http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...ng-of-Madhhabs

[namaikaimvputka]

If u are shafi it is allowed, if u are hanafi it isn't.

[GrileVege]

If u are shafi it is allowed, if u are hanafi it isn't.

I'm pretty sure you got that the wrong way round lol.

[Esmeralfaf]

If u are shafi it is allowed, if u are hanafi it isn't.

In the school of al-Imam al-Shafi´i (rah) it is not seen as "allowed", rather makruh; meaning it is believed to be disliked by Allah Ta´ala.

Wa'Allahu a´lam.