Why are you Hanafi or Maliki!
 

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

I was born Hanafi http://discussworldissues.com/forums.../icon_wink.gif.

On a more serious note, I don't really even know much about the other Madhabs, aside from two chapters of Hanbali fiqh, and I liked the Hanafi madhab more.

Also, changing madhabs tends to create fitna in Afghan families. So, even if I ever did want to change madhab, I wouldn't simply to avoid causing problems in my family.

i would have chosen to be Maliki (solely because of how awesome Imam Maalik RH was), the only reason im hanafi is because it is easier in my location to find hanafi ulemah to ask about fiqhi stuff should i need to

@brother nahda, i thought you were hanafi till yesterday. Now I see "don't know". What happened?

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

I m Shafi'i because its the predominant Madhab i was raised in. Also the ulema i have access to are Shafi'i. I don't think the Madhab matters as long as one is following one. Usually a person follows the Madhab that he/she is taught salah. Its difficult to learn another Madhab when one is grown up.

I personally don't mind following any Madhab as long as I have access to the respective Ulema. If the Father is Hanafi and the Mother is Shafi'i but they are permanently settled in a Maliki area, then its better to teach the children Maliki. Its just a matter of easy access.

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

Because of the book, uqoodul jammaan fi manaaqib imam al a'tham abi hanifata an nu'man.

There's other significant reasons I'd say, but not as significant as that one...

Just a matter of convenience. I met more hanafi scholars and learned hanafi fiqh. If I had met scholars from other madhabs I would have chosen another madhab. If I had to choose another madhab I would choose the hanbali madhab or the shafi madhab as I like their hadeeth approach. The only problem with the hanbali madhab is that there are hardly any teachers of the madhab. I don't really care what madhab a person is or even if a person is a salafi.

I was born into a Hanafi family.

Had that not been the case and I were given the option of choosing a madhab, I'd probably choose either the Hanbali, Maliki, or Shafi'i madhab, in that order over the Hanafi one.

- easily accessible
- can study with qualified Hanafi scholars anywhere in the world
- well-defined, uniform system of learning (darse nizami/iftaa stages)
- 'Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi

That's a sane choice to make, availability of Fuqaha is very important to safeguard our deen, this is what i explain to people who get inclined towards other Masalik.

As-salamu ´alaykum,

My preference for the math'hab of al-Imam ash-Shafi´i is based on its' Usoul, specifically its' direct and straight forward approach towards the Hadith of Rasoulu'Allah, salla'Allahu ´alayhi wa aalihi wa sallam.

wa'Llahu a'lam

Shalom Aleikhom,

I do not have any madhab. I am interested to follow this thread and learn about people, how and why they belong to a certain madhab. Interesting. From what I have seen, almost 99.99% time, it is the fact that they were born in to a family that follows the madhab that they belong to.

PEACE
---------------------- Student of Allah

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

This is off-topic, but I've had a question lingering in my mind for some time regarding which I haven't been able to get a straight answer yet. If I'm not mistaken, according to the Shafi'i madhab, jizya is only to be collected from Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians. What about people that do not fit into one of these categories? Are they left with only two options? If so, this is a bit unsettling considering what would have occurred had this been implemented during the course of Muslim rule in India, since the vast majority of the population were mushrik Hindus.

godiali the treatment of ahlud dhimmah maybe also slightly unsettling for many people....

Same is the case with 99.99% + .01% born Muslims, they born into a family of Muslims

Wa ´alaykum as-salam Mawlana Godilali,

What is the main concern to me is what was implemented by Rasoulu'Allah (salla'Allahu ´alayhi wa alihi wa sallam) and the policy of Khulafa Ar-Rashidin, radiya'Allahu ´anhum. I am not saying who is right or wrong in this. However, the Mushrikin in the Arabian Peninsula were left with only two options. And what we find in early Islamic history is that often people were forced to choose if they were not from the Ahl al-Kitab. From a Fiqhi point of view, even Zoroastrians are within the realm of ikhtilaf. We do find some Muslim rulers who chose to be more pragmatic (if we can call it that). But there is a difference between the theory and the practice. At the end of the day, many Islamic rules are "unsettling" to people, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. If it is unsettling when it comes to the Mushrikin of Hind, why not the Mushrikin of Arabia? I fail to see the consistency.

wa'Llahu a'lam

Barakallahu fikum,

Admittedly, growing up in the West has left many of us with some cultural baggage and at times, it can be hard to prevent it from influencing our understanding of the deen.

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

I've heard the Hanabilah have the same opinion. Is this true?

yes the hanbalis hold the same opinion. These are all aspects of our deen and we should not feel ashamed of them.

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

I think if those opinions had been followed in the Indian subcontinent, the state of Muslims in India would have been a lot stronger. It was this complacency that allowed Muslims to become influenced by Hindus and incorporate many bid'aat such as saint worship and syncretic practices that eventually lead to many within the Mughal empire (including the emperors themselves) declaring themselves to be murtadd - a prime example is Akbar. Allahu a'lam.