[funnyPasds]

My primary aim in starting this thread is this:

Certain rulings, at least on the surface, appear to contradict the rulings issued by the early fuqaha. Someone here might know the answer why. I have contacted scholars directly but the answers were very unsatisfactory to say the least.

Any clarification by the scholars here would be very useful for me

Have you tried contacting Shaykh Taha Keran?

[FBtquXT8]

Dear brother, it was established multiple times in the other thread that an-Nawawi did not issue a new ruling. He gave preference to something else narrated from Imam Shafi'i. As I wrote, speaking on authority of what Maulana Taha Karaan said in his lecture on the mad'hab of Imam ash-Shafi'i:



Secondly, it is not precisely respectful to refer to the opinions of great scholars like an-Nawawi as revisionist, nor do I see how terming something as makruh is permitting it, and your lionization of the early Imams, while nobly intended I am certain, is reaching a strange level.

Thirdly, a brother quoted al-Waraqat in that thread and it decisively established what makruh is in the mad'hab.

Fourthly, to refer to terming something as makruh as 'permitting' it is ridiculous.

Fifthly, if you are claiming ijmaa' on something, then it is upon you to bring forth some proof that such ijmaa' exists. Why not check Ibn al-Mundhir's book, or Ibn Hazm's book with Ibn Taymiyyah's checking, or something to that effect? It would greatly benefit us all to see such entries.

May Allah bless you and your zealous concern for the religion.

Shaykh,

When I used the word revisionist, I was referring to the ulama today, and primarily that of the Hanafi Madhab, who are issuing rulings that completely contradict those issued by the early Mujtahids. The following are a few examples that have become increasingly prevalent today:

1) Rulings of permissibility for building over graves.
2) Rulings of permissibility for trimming below a fist-length, or even shaving.
3) Rulings of permissibility for tawassul/istagathah using words that easily lead to shirk.
4) Rulings of permissibilty for music.
5) Widespread displacement of the Sunnah practice, with eight rakats Taraweeh.

Contrary to those brothers (not referring to you) who appear to break into a frenzy when someone asks genuine questions regarding another Madhab, I believe that every person, be he Shafi'i, Maliki, or Hanbali, has the right to seek clarification from the Hanafis regarding the basis of the rulings mentioned above.

All of these rulings can be justified based on the Tarjeeh, new Ijtihad, or failing these two, an inferred non-traceable Tarjeeh from some latter day Mujtahid (let's say for example Ibn Abideen).

As far as I have understood thus far, for each and every ruling of Imam Nawawi that goes against the clearly recorded texts of the early Mujtahids confirming the most obvious import of the Ahadith, we are to assume that he had come across another opposing ruling of the founding Mujtahid, or some other unrecorded Daleel he had privy to, which must take precedence?

You do realise that from at least one angle, this rank conferred upon Imam Nawawi, which you seem to find acceptable, far supersedes my perfectly justified 'lionization' of the, clearly divinely ordained, entire formation process of the compendium of rulings that constituted the early Madhab.

Even the modernists demand of Ibn Taymiyyah and others, clearly recorded Daleel, or at least a traceable tarjeeh, before adopting their rulings that contradict those issued by the early Mujtahids.

And even if we were to dismiss the clearly recorded ruling of the early Mujtahids, and the majority of the fuqaha, shouldn't Imam Nawawi's ruling on plucking a few grey hairs be taken into account when determining what he himself may have meant when he used the word Makruh?

Regarding the word 'permissible', I used it in its linguistic sense to mean something that can be practised without condemnation, which is the meaning clearly ascribed to Makruh, in practical terms, by many ulama today.

[pIp83Uns]

Have you tried contacting Shaykh Taha Keran?

If his email is available publically could you post it here. If not, could you email me his contact.

[ovH9wfSJ]

If his email is available publically could you post it here. If not, could you email me his contact.

I though I had it, but it seems I remember wrongly..

Anyway, the following is all I could find; I think you will be able to reach him following one of these routes insha'Allah:

http://www.shafiifiqh.com/about/shaykh-taha-karaan/
http://www.muslim.co.za/education/co...versities/duai (Phone number and madrasa address)
http://web.archive.org/web/200711261...za/contact.htm (webmaster's contact)

(P.S.: Shaykh Taha Karaan himself masha'Allah has a fistful lenght beard).

[u2ZQGC6b]

If anybody can correct me if I've misunderstood the passage above, Imam al-Ghazali appears to focus more on the fact that the process of adopting a madhab involves believing that it is the best, and that all its rulings are correct, rather than elaborating on the reason why one should adopt it in the first place i.e. preventing the non-Mujtahid from collecting concessions - a reason that most likely can be taken for granted when the fuqaha ruled on the necessity of Taqleed Shaksi, at the least amongst the Shafi'is, since the view of its Ashaab is clear as stated by Imam an-Nawawi:

"The second [opinion] and Abu al-Hasan Ilkiya was assured of it is it is necessary for him [i.e. the layperson to adhere to a specific madhhab] - and this applies to all who have not reached the level of ijtihad from the jurists and the scholars of the remaining sciences - so that one does not collect the concessions of the madhhabs; as distinguished from the first period, when the madhhabs were not codified, so [it was not possible] to collect their concessions. Based on this, it is necessary for him to select a madhhab he will do taqlid of in everything. He cannot adopt a madhhab based on whim, nor based on what he found his father upon [i.e. but must investigate which madhhab he feels is the most superior]. This is the viewpoint of the Ashaab."

And:

“Its reason is that if it were permissible to adhere to any madhhab one wished, it would lead to collecting the concessions of the madhhabs, in accordance with one’s desires, and opting between legalisation and illegalisation, obligation and permission, and this will lead to relinquishing the noose of moral responsibility (taklif); as distinguished from the early period, because [at that time] there were no refined madhhabs that encompassed the rulings of [all] outcomes. Based on this, it is necessary for him to make effort in opting for one madhhab he will adhere to specifically.” (al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 1:55)

He also states that the most correct opinion according to al-Qaffal is that a layperson does have a madhhab and he cannot go against it. (Sharh al-Muhadhdhab 1:93)

In his fatawa, Haythami re-affirms the position of the Ashaab, before going on to mention his own and Imam Nawawi's preference:

"He [Haythami] was asked: Is it obligatory after the codification of madhhabs to stick to one of them? And can one transfer from what he stuck to? He replied: That which is transmitted in Ziyadat al-Rawdah [by al-Nawawi] from the Ashab [the major early mujtahideen scholars of the madhhab] is the obligation of that."

[DiBellaBam]

I though I had it, but it seems I remember wrongly..

Anyway, the following is all I could find; I think you will be able to reach him following one of these routes insha'Allah:

http://www.shafiifiqh.com/about/shaykh-taha-karaan/
http://www.muslim.co.za/education/co...versities/duai (Phone number and madrasa address)
http://web.archive.org/web/200711261...za/contact.htm (webmaster's contact)

(P.S.: Shaykh Taha Karaan himself masha'Allah has a fistful lenght beard).

[BegeMoT]

It appears that unfortunately Shaykh Jadeed has left this forum.

[Laqswrnm]

Brother amr123 received the following answer regarding the Shafi'i position on the beard:

Today after Juma'a I enquired to the Shafi'i Alim of my Mosque. He is an Alim who runs the Madrassa. Around 35 years of age, has full sunnah beard.

Here are the following points that I understood from him:
-Definition of beard is the same as hanafis, not just lihya, but all parts are considered wajib.
-A handful is Sunnah.
-Trimming (decreasing length) is ok as long as one doesn't shave.
-Shaving is Makrooh tahrimi(prohibitively disliked). Which is applicable not only to the lihya but to the sides as well.
-I mentioned Shaykh Amjad's fatwa and the practice of the Shafi's in Hadramawt,
to that he replied:
-What he mentioned above(makrooh tahrimi) is the official position of Shafi'i Madhab.
(I really felt like a fool on unnecessarily speaking on fiqhi matters)
-The shafi'is of hadramawt are following the minority opinion.
-He did not say that makrooh in shafi'i usool doesn't mean tanzihi. But he specifically mentioned shaving is tahrimi.
-Those who shave repeatedly will be called a fasiq, He is not be a witness in nikah, not to be followed behind in Salah etc.

[feAilei1]

Brother amr123 received the following answer regarding the Shafi'i position on the beard:

That settles it once and for all then.

[tearidrusydet]

Throughout the ages, a divergence tends to develop between the original rulings of the Madhab, and the views of the ulama of a particular era. The role of the Mujaddid and the Muhaqqiq is to revive the original teachings. There is compelling evidence that such a revival in scholarship and tahqeeq took place last century at the the school of Deoband. A group of ulama emerged who produced innumerable scholarly works which resembled, as attested to by scholars globally, the works of the early classical scholars. Since their focus was the Hanafi Madhab, a revival of the original teachings of the Hanafi Madhab took place.

These Muhaqqiqs did not accept the rulings of the latter day fuqaha, without first deriving and verifying the actual ruling from the Usuls of the madhab, and according to usul al-Fiqh of the Hanafi madhab. If the ruling differed, they adopted and revived the original ruling. Any view attributed to the Hanafi Madhab had to be based on reliable quotes from the founders of the madhab and verified by the early Fuqaha.

For a glimpse of the extent to which this divergence has developed between the ruling of the contemporary ulama and the Madhab, one only needs to observe how widespread the following erroneous rulings, which are completely contrary to the ruling of the Madhab, are propagated by Hanafi scholars both in the sub-continent and the Arabian peninsula:

1) Building over the graves is permissible, and even recommended.

2) Trimming the beard below a fist-length is permissible. Some Hanafi ulama go as far as claiming that shaving is permissible.

3) Letting the trousers hang below the ankle is permissible if done without pride.

4) Attributing exclusive qualities of Allah to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace). For example, many ulama today attribute Ilm al-ghayb (such as knowledge of the last hour) to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) despite the fact that the classical fuqaha have condemned very harshly. It is stated in the authoritative Hanafi texts, that anybody that attributes the ghayb to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) has committed Kufr!

There is nothing to assume that the state of the other three Madhabs have not deteriorated in the same manner.

Due to the clear disparity between the categorical commands of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) as understood by the Salaf, and the rulings of ulama who claim to be faithful representatives of the Madhabs, many sincere Muslims develop an inevitable distrust for the ulama, and fall for Salafism. One only needs to look at the following thread to see how certain groups of ulama have been pulling the wool over the eyes for so many years:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...ing-on-graves)

In this thread I wish to discuss certain rulings attributed to a Madhab, which appear (at least on the surface) quite clearly contrary to the rulings issued by the early fuqaha.

[geraint.faughn]

Throughout the ages, a divergence tends to develop between the original rulings of the Madhab, and the views of the ulama of a particular era. The role of the Mujaddid and the Muhaqqiq is to revive the original teachings. There is compelling evidence that such a revival in scholarship and tahqeeq took place last century at the the school of Deoband. A group of ulama emerged who produced innumerable scholarly works which resembled, as attested to by scholars globally, the works of the early classical scholars. Since their focus was the Hanafi Madhab, a revival of the original teachings of the Hanafi Madhab took place.

These Muhaqqiqs did not accept the rulings of the latter day fuqaha, without first deriving and verifying the actual ruling from the Usuls of the madhab, and according to usul al-Fiqh of the Hanafi madhab. If the ruling differed, they adopted and revived the original ruling. Any view attributed to the Hanafi Madhab had to be based on reliable quotes from the founders of the madhab and verified by the early Fuqaha.

For a glimpse of the extent to which this divergence has developed between the ruling of the contemporary ulama and the Madhab, one only needs to observe how widespread the following erroneous rulings, which are completely contrary to the ruling of the Madhab, are propagated by Hanafi scholars both in the sub-continent and the Arabian peninsula:

1) Building over the graves is permissible, and even recommended.

2) Trimming the beard below a fist-length is permissible. Some Hanafi ulama go as far as claiming that shaving is permissible.

3) Letting the trousers hang below the ankle is permissible if done without pride.

4) Attributing exclusive qualities of Allah to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace). For example, many ulama today attribute Ilm al-ghayb (such as knowledge of the last hour) to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) despite the fact that the classical fuqaha have condemned very harshly. It is stated in the authoritative Hanafi texts, that anybody that attributes the ghayb to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) has committed Kufr!

There is nothing to assume that the state of the other three Madhabs have not deteriorated in the same manner.

Due to the clear disparity between the categorical commands of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) as understood by the Salaf, and the rulings of ulama who claim to be faithful representatives of the Madhabs, many sincere Muslims develop an inevitable distrust for the ulama, and fall for Salafism. One only needs to look at the following thread to see how certain groups of ulama have been pulling the wool over the eyes for so many years:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...ing-on-graves)

In this thread I wish to discuss certain rulings attributed to a Madhab, which appear (at least on the surface) quite clearly contrary to the rulings issued by the early fuqaha.

And what is your qualification by the way? I mean we need to know whether you are a man of credibility before we consume everything you give us like blind sheep? I'm sure you agree akhi, because I know you're sincere and you would want us to research more about this issue but the truth is that some of us (although a minority) are not really as sincere and we will actually accept everything you give us without a thought.
Hope that didn't offend you beloved akhi.

[DoctorQuquriramba]

And what is your qualification by the way? I mean we need to know whether you are a man of credibility before we consume everything you give us like blind sheep? I'm sure you agree akhi, because I know you're sincere and you would want us to research more about this issue but the truth is that some of us (although a minority) are not really as sincere and we will actually accept everything you give us without a thought.
Hope that didn't offend you beloved akhi.

I only wish to discuss some of the rulings that are usually discussed on this forum anyway - for example the issue of trimming the beard which you asked regarding as well.

I wish to ask questions of knowledgable brothers on this forum regarding certain rulings being propagated by scholars today, which appear to contradict the rulings of the early fuqaha of the Madhab. I have contacted certain prominent scholars myself regarding some of the issues, and the answers were shockingly deficient to say the least.

[BgpOoGI2]

I only wish to discuss some of the rulings that are usually discussed on this forum anyway - for example the issue of trimming the beard which you asked regarding as well.

I wish to ask questions of knowledgable brothers on this forum regarding certain rulings being propagated by scholars today, which appear to contradict the rulings of the early fuqaha of the Madhab. I have contacted certain prominent scholars myself regarding some of the issues, and the answers were shockingly deficient to say the least.

You are going to ask knowledgable brothers to teach you about whether the teaching of scholars is true or not? LOL. It's like asking a student whether what his teacher is teaching him is wrong or right.

[Zenunlild]

You are going to ask knowledgable brothers to teach you about whether the teaching of scholars is true or not? LOL. It's like asking a student whether what his teacher is teaching him is wrong or right.

it has been my experience that scholars can be silent.... Even when they know....

I found students to be more forthcoming with proofs and evidences..... and are willing to discuss, while scholars may not be willing to....

[SeelaypeKet]

it has been my experience that scholars can be silent.... Even when they know....

I found students to be more forthcoming with proofs and evidences..... and are willing to discuss, while scholars may not be willing to....

It what sense do you mean they were silent? You mean you sent them an old email and they haven't responded? Maybe they never got to reach it due to the large amount of emails they get. Or did you question them in public? Maybe them saying that thing will be harmful towards them and so they didn't say it. BUT if you went to them in private and you told them and they remained silent and they didn't give you a reason, then okay, you have an excuse, but that doesn't discredit their nobility.

[Marinausa]

It what sense do you mean they were silent? You mean you sent them an old email and they haven't responded? Maybe they never got to reach it due to the large amount of emails they get. Or did you question them in public? Maybe them saying that thing will be harmful towards them and so they didn't say it. BUT if you went to them in private and you told them and they remained silent and they didn't give you a reason, then okay, you have an excuse, but that doesn't discredit their nobility.

I simply said they were silent... All the above... Some times you have to ask several scholars just to get an answer... I think the reason they don't answer is they want you to submit to them... Obey them without question..... Scholars don't like difficult questions, they like question like, how many times a day do you have to pray??? If I break my wudu in the middle of the prayer, should I stop praying and make wudu and pray again???? They like questions that everybody already knows the answers to....

[MyLeva]

I simply said they were silent... All the above... Some times you have to ask several scholars just to get an answer... I think the reason they don't answer is they want you to submit to them... Obey them without question..... Scholars don't like difficult questions, they like question like, how many times a day do you have to pray??? If I break my wudu in the middle of the prayer, should I stop praying and make wudu and pray again???? They like questions that everybody already knows the answers to....

Becareful what you imply towards the beloved scholars for they are the messengers of the messenger. They are among those who fear Allah the most according to an interpretation of an ayat and they are those who allow us to still live islam in times of corruption. Maybe you haven't met real scholars, because they are the most open and gentle people I've ever met.

[alenbarbaf]

I would like to ask the scholars and knowledgable brothers here whether the following four statements are correct regarding the Shafi'i Madhab on the issue of trimming/shaving the beard:

1) Other than solitary opinions, the ruling for shaving is the same as that for trimming.

It seems there is no distinction between shaving and trimming in the Shafi'i madhab. According to the Shafi'i fuqaha, hadiths such as the one regarding Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) trimming to a fistful, are inadmissible as evidence to override the command to lengthen the beard. These Hadiths were deemed too weak to be used as a concession to the command to grow unrestrictedly. Imam Ghazali's use of such Hadith was refuted by the major Shafi'i fuqaha.

2) The ruling by the majority of fuqaha before and after Imam Nawawi was that the command to lengthen the beard is of the wujoob category, in agreement with the other three Madhabs.

From: http://spa.qibla.com/issue_view.asp?...14618&CATE=414

"The majority of scholars have understood the above-mentioned hadiths—all of which command Muslims to grow full beards—in their immediately obvious sense, coming to the conclusion that it is unlawful to completely shave the beard. This position has been transmitted from the imam of our school, Imam Shafi`i (may Allah be pleased with him and have mercy on him), and a number of Shafi`i scholars—both early and late—have adopted it as their preferred position. Among the early Shafi`is who held this position are the two great imams, Qaffal al-Shashi and Abu `Abdullah al-Halimi. Among the late Shafi`is who held this position are the two imams, Ibn al-Rif`ah and Shihab al-Adhra`i."

3) There were scholars after Imam Nawawi who adopted taqleed of Imam Shafi'i and the early fuqaha rather than Imam Nawawi on this issue.

"...Among the late Shafi`is who held this position are the two imams, Ibn al-Rif`ah and Shihab al-Adhra`i."

4) Imam Nawawi's ruling regarding shaving is Makruh, but his ruling regarding plucking a few grey hairs is Haram.

http://www.sunnipath.com/library/Hadith/H0004P0297.aspx

[Flikemommoilt]

My primary aim in starting this thread is this:

Certain rulings, at least on the surface, appear to contradict the rulings issued by the early fuqaha. Someone here might know the answer why. I have contacted scholars directly but the answers were very unsatisfactory to say the least.

Any clarification by the scholars here would be very useful for me

[Opinion_counts]

My primary aim in starting this thread is this:

Certain rulings, at least on the surface, appear to contradict the rulings issued by the early fuqaha. Someone here might know the answer why. I have contacted scholars directly but the answers were very unsatisfactory to say the least.

Any clarification by the scholars here would be very useful for me

I'm pretty confident that there are no scholars here. They are waaay too busy to hang around in forums. You might possibly get pseudo-scholars in disguise and you accepting their opinion will be in your hands. Thought I'd let you know akhi. Be careful okay?