When Presented with Facts

Abu Muhammad Ibraheem al-Hanbali

Over the last few weeks, I have been involved in numerous dialogues with cult members of the Wahhabi Khawaarij. I took this task upon myself to socially experiment and record the typical responses that one would receive when advising them they are in a cult that Allah has cursed.  This study has been very important to da’wah efforts as Sunni Muslims need to understand the typical responses of the Wahhabi Khaarijite when trying to offer them salvational truths.

The following is a point by point list of the most common responses used by Wahhabis. One has to realize that that Wahhabi is often blinded by the deep love and affection he has towards his Khaarijite peers, so much so that all logic, sense and reasoning is out the window. However, over many dialogues with Wahhabis, I have penned the following points for myself and others, to respond to each given situation accordingly.

1. Character Assassination

You may find this to be the most typical response from a Wahhabi, as they are faced with an all new challenge of defending their beliefs. Many of them may not have even read Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s books in totality, many of them just simply follow the young and foolish crowd, because as the modern fad has it, it is cool to rebel.

Therefore, when faced with such evidences that Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab is a mass murderer, rapist and a Khaarijite, their first reaction is to laugh and then belittle your level of knowledge, and even label you a deviant, even if they have never met you in person, or know nothing about you. They could even say this directly to your face, or behind your back, however they wish to do it, it is all the same.

You could be a student of Islam, or even a scholar, yet you will find this response in the majority of cases, speaking like they have some secret knowledge of what knowledge you have studied without even meeting you.

A Sunni Muslim in such a situation should praise them for their “ilm ul-ghayb” sarcastically and remind them, that according to Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, they can be killed on the spot for claiming they know the unseen, which constitutes fortune telling. You will find that the laugh out loud attitude has suddenly disappeared.

They will to hurl many insults at you. But one has to realize that these insults are intended to wind you up, to raise your blood pressure, to make you look stupid in front of the crowd, or even to make themselves feel superior and a number of other reasons alike. Sunni Muslims must realize this, and not fall for the bait of thinking that these insults merit a response.

The trick is to simply ignore all of their insults and keep focus of the most pressing issues at hand. If you fall into the trap of defending yourself from insults, you will lose the discussion totally, as the discussion has now been diverted from the subject itself and now entirely focuses upon you and your character flaws. This is also a common ploy of the accursed one Iblis, as he preys upon your human weaknesses. Therefore seek refuge in Allah from the Wahhabi’s fitnah just as you would seek refuge in Allah from the Shaytaan.

Such responses fall under the common fallacy known as character assassination. If they cannot handle the evidences, even if it is as small as the title of the topic you have presented before them, they will result to character assassination, where they attack you personally without even looking at the facts presented.

Their flaw in logic is, if they can show the people that they can upset you, make you angry, by hurling insults, disrespecting anything from your education to your mother, then, according to them, they have successfully destroyed your argument. But in reality what they would have really done, if you fell for their bait, is divert the subject from whatever is to the subject of you, yourself and your character.

One must simply remind such Wahhabis that the subject is not you or your character, or personal flaws, spelling mistakes etc. But the subject is that was initially being discussed. In this you will give them no choice but to discuss the subject at hand, or run. However, if they persist in their ignorance, it is advised to cut the argument short, as the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam advised us not to cast our pearls to dogs or swine. Time is one of those pearls. If the discussion is fruitless, then move on to somebody else, as timewasters should not merit your time.

point 2 coming soon

The Mainstay Concerning Jurisprudence (Al-Umda fi l-Fiqh – Hanbali School of Law) Imåm Muwaffaq ad-Din ‹Abdu’llåh ibn Ahmad ibn Qudåma al-Maqdisº Shaikh al-Islåm. Imåm al-Muwaffaq ibn Qudåma (A.H. 541-620) was one of the luminaries of his day and age. Born in the town of Jammåil in Nablus in Palestine, he emigrated to Damascus with his family at the age of eight, after the Crusaders had seized control of his country. Studying at first under the tutelage of his father, Shaikh Abu ’l-Abbås Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qudåma, he learned the rudiments of the religious sciences, and the texts of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence, including the Mukhtasar [Compendium] of al-Kharaqi. At the next stage he studied under several of the Shaikhs of Damascus and continued to make progress in learning, until he reached the age of twenty. Then, between the years A.H. 560 and 561 he embarked on an educational expedition to Baghdåd. At the outset of his career, al-Muwaffaq spent a brief period in the presence of Shaikh ‹Abd al-Qådir al-Jilåni. Under the Shaikh, then in the ninetieth year his life, he studied the Mukhtasar [Compendium] of al-Kharaqi at the level of understanding and meticulous scrutiny. Shaikh ‹Abd al-Qådir completed his earthly life shortly after that, so al-Muwaffaq turned to the Shaikh of the Hanbalis and the leading jurist of ‹Iråq, Nåsih al-Islåm Abu ’l-Fath Nasr ibn Fityån ibn Matar an-Nahrawånº, well-known as Ibn al-Munå (A.H. 477–564). Under him he studied the jurisprudence of the school of Imåm Ahmad [ibn Hanbal]. After four years in Baghdåd he returned to Damascus and there he preoccupied himself with the composition of his great commentary [al-Mughni] on al-Kharaqi’s Mukhtasar. Translated by Muhtar Holland, one of the foremost translators of classical Ar Publisher: Al Baz Author: Imåm al-Muwaffaq ibn Qudåma (A.H. 541-620) Pages: 368 Price: £27.99

AVAILABLE HERE http://www.islamicbookstoreonline.net/3-4369-1-the-mainstay-concerning-jurisprudence-al-umda-fi-l-fiqh.aspx

Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad – The Luminance of the [Hanbali] Creed: The Creed of the Ahl us-Sunnah vol. 1

By Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi/ rendered into English by Abu Muhammad Ibraheem

The Author of this text is Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi, d.620 A profound scholar of the traditional Hanbali madh-hab, Direct student of Shaykh ‘Abdul Qaadir al-Jilaani, and Defender of Jerusalem under the leadership of Saladin al-Ayyubi.

The Holy Prophet [saw] said: “Adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khalifahs that come after me. Bite upon it with your molar teeth [nawaakhidh] and beware of newly invented matters, for certainly every newly invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a misguidance”

Ibn Qudaamah highlights the creed of the Ahl us-Sunnah as refutes the innovations of those who have gone astray. This book “Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad” i.e. the Luminance of Creed, serves as a guiding light to the correct path, the path of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.

This book has dedicated chapters regarding Allah’s Mutashaabihah Attrubutes and the approach of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah regarding them, The Qur’an being the Eternal uncreated Speech of Allah, The Believers vision of Allah on Yawm ul-Qiyaamah, Imaan and what it consists of, the rights of the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam, and the excellence of the Sahaabah radyAllah anhum.

This book also holds Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal’s treatise on creed Usul us-Sunnah which is along the very same lines of Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad.

As a extra bonus chapters there are four appendices:

1. Who are the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah

2. Regarding the Ash’aris and Maturidis

3. The Understanding Bid’ah According to Traditional Islam

4. Following a Madh-hab

This book is a valuable contribution deserving to be read by every Muslim [and non-Muslim] sincerely interested in traditional Muslim creed.

The book can be purchased here

Seven years ago Abu Usama challenged anybody to show him how the Milaad un-Nabi is from the Sunnah . He offered the prize money of five thousand pounds to anybody that could proof this.

I wish to take up that challenge and claim that prize money, therefore, I challenge Abu Usama from Green lane masjid in Birmingham to a written debate on the issue.

I am not interested in sharing platforms, televised debates and so forth, I prefer a written debate which then can be decided by an independent poll in which nobody from either side can tamper with to make their side victorious. I want the common community members [al-Jamaa'ah] to decide the winner.

This is not a get rich opportunity for me. Should Abu Usama keep his word, the five thousand pounds will then be used to put my girls through private Islamic education. In which I shall produce a receipt and witnesses to how I have used this money for a pure Islamic purpose.

If he bravely accepts the offer, then he is to pen why Milaad is reprehensible, not from the Sunnah, and more importantly, how this “bid’ah” and the people that practice it will be in the fire. Then once he has hosted it from an official website, I will there pen my document and demonstrate how the milaad is from the Sunnah and the Shari’ah.

[UPDATE: They are calling for a public debate, however I decline. It has to be asked why a public debate has been called for when a written debate would suffice. O Yee seekers of pomp and show]

regards and wa as-Salaam Abu Muhammad al-Hanbali

Wahhbi creed is clear cut about those who seek tawassul through the “dead” by calling upon them. Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s Nawaaqid ul-Islaam [the factors in which Wahhabis claim nullify a person’s Islam], p. 308 where Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab said:

“He who sets up intermediaries between him and Allah, calling unto them and asking them to intercede on his behalf with Allah, and putting trust in them is an infidel [i.e. a Kaafir, a disbeliever] according to the consensus of the scholars”.

This is exactly what Muslims do when we make tawassul through the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم). We “call unto them” addressing him with the vocative particle [harf an-nidaa] “Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم)”.  Wahhabis need an ‘Arabic lesson in al-Munaada .

The Wahhabi cult teaches that calling unto [du’a] to other than Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) is worship, and they misuse the hadeeth which says “du’a is worship”, so when any Sunni Muslim is caught saying “Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم)” at his grave, he is then automatically accused of worshipping the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) by calling unto him, thus deemed a mushrik [a pagan] for doing so –

He is then accused of calling unto other than Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) and deemed a Kaafir. To demonstrate this point further then let us return to the statement of Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab’s book Nawaaqid ul-Islam, Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab said in point number two:

“Man ja’ala baynahu wa bayna Allah wa saa’itaa yad’uwhum wa yas’aluhum wa yatawakkaulu alyhim. Kafara ijmaa’a”

Now take special note that Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab used the imperfect verb “yad’u-hum” meaning “they are calling or will call upon them” this verb derives from the same root as du’a which simply means to call upon see p. 282 of the Hans Wehr ‘Arabic dictionary.

The Sahaabah addressed the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) respectfully by saying “Yaa Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم)”, “Yaa RasulAllah (صلى الله عليه وسلم)” and why? Take note of the following Qur’anic passage from Surah an-Nur [24] ayah 63:

“la taj’alu du’a ar-Rasul baynakum ka- du’a ba’dikum ba’da”

Which translates as:

“Do not make the calling [du’a] of the Messenger between you like the calling  [du’a] of each other”

Meaning address the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) respectfully! This is why they used “Yaa RasulAllah” in his very lifetime out of respect. But more importantly also notice that the Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) used the word du’a!

Wahhabis make a distinction here. They argue that when the Messenger was alive, then its permissible to call upon him [du’a] using the vocative noun “Yaa” but now he is “dead”, calling unto him [du’a] is now considered as worship, thus calling unto the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) is shirk [i.e. idolatry].

So according to Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdul Wahhab, to yad’u-hum [to call upon them] by saying “Ya RasulAllah” is indeed an act that is considered by the Wahhabi’s to take one out of the fold of Islam whether you are doing tawssaul, asking for Shifaa’a or istighathah. This can be further seen by the fact Wahhabi scholar Bilal Phillips wrote in his book Fundamentals of Tawheed p. 27-28:

“The Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said in no uncertain terms “prayer (du’a) is worship…If somebody prays to the Prophet, to so called saints [remember Bilal Phillips means by this calling upon them]…asking for help or asking them to request help from Allah, they have also committed shirk [i.e. they have became a Kaafir Mushrik]”

It is then clear that Wahhabis deem such tawaasul as calling upon the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) by directly addressing him “Yaa RasulAllah” as major shirk, regardless if we are asking for help, or for them to supplicate to Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) for us.

However the big burning question here is this the stance of Muslim orthodoxy? Is this the position that the scholars of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’a hold?  Do the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah believe that it is an act of idolatry to address the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in his grave?

According to Tafseer Ibn Katheer Surah an-Nisa [4] ayah 64 it is not shirk to call upon [du’a] the Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) whilst he is in his grave.

Before we go to Tafseer Ibn Katheer and look at the evidence [scans available] I would like to mention that this cannot be found in the ‘Arabic versions, nor is it translated in the Dar us-Salaam versions that are published by any Wahhabi publisher. It is purposefully whitewashed for the very reason that it defies the Wahhabi creed and they cannot have that as prove against them.

So what they have done is they have put out “Saheeh Tafseer Ibn Katheer”, but when they say “Saheeh” they do not mean authentic, they mean that they have corrected Ibn Katheer’s (رحمه الله) tafseer as they deemed that what he (رحمه الله) mentioned was dalaalah [misguidance].

This is one of the many reasons many new converts remain blind to the tricks of the Wahhabi organization. I have tried to tell them they are being deceived and they need to learn ‘Arabic so they can analyze these things for themselves, but I find that many Wahhabi converts are too huffed up with pride and are too far gone to even sincerely speak too. The once sincere conversation soon turns sour.

However, it is my challenge to them to study the following in ‘Arabic and then turn to the Dar us-Salaam and ask themselves why do Wahhabis keep white washing Sunni texts which clearly display evidences against their own creed?

Let us now quote from Tafseer Ibn Katheer:

“Ataabi raltes that he was sitting at the grave of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) when an Arab came and said “As-Salaamu Alayka YAA RASULALLAH” then he quoted the related ayah about seeking forgiveness.”

See Tafseer Ibn Katheer, vol. 1, p. 328

Before my readership starts calling me a misleading Barelwi prentending to be a Hanbali, let us look to the Hanbali scholars and see what they have to offer.

There is no doubt to the authenticity of this narration used by Ibn Kathher as Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi (رحمه الله) included this is his al-Mughni, vol. 3, pp. 599-601 [scan available].

The Shaafi Master, Imaam Nawawi (رحمه الله) also included this narration in his book al-Adhkaar pp. 218-221 [evidence here]

The Maaliki Master Qadi Iyaad also documented this is his classical text Ash-Shifaa’a and other countless Imaams from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah have used this as an evidence as seeking a need.

For example, the great relied upon Hanbali scholar Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdasi wrote in his al-Wasiyyah:

“When seeking for a need to be fulfilled from Allah ta’ala then perform the ablution and two units of nawafil prayer, relying on Allah ta’alaa and sending salutations on the Prophet sal Allahu alayhi wasallam and say the following ….“O Allah, I ask you and turn to you by Your Prophet Muhammad [sal Allahu alayhi wasallam], the Prophet of Mercy. YAA MUHAMMAD!!! I turn by you to my Lord and your Lord aza wajjal for Him to settle my need for me”

Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen (رحمه الله) then says after quoting this du’a “The early Muslims [i.e. the Salaf] had their needs fulfilled by saying this”

Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen Ibn Qudaamah’s (رحمه الله) work al-Wassiyah has been translated by Abu Ja’far al-Hanbali and is available for people to read here: http://thinkhanbali.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/word-of-advice.pdf and it has also been translated by Aisha Bewly.

You will also be able to find this hadeeth in Sunan at-tirmidhi and Ibn Maajah, Imaam Suyuti (رحمه الله) classified this hadeeth as saheeh in his al-Jami us-Saghir hadeeth no. 1279; and again Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) testifies to this hadeeth in his Mansik: Kash-Shaaf ul-Qinaa, vol. 2, pp. 70-73.

Now this is the interesting part, we can see from the above reference that Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) allowed tawassul through the Prophet by addressing the Prophet in his grave with the vocative noun “Yaa” as in “Yaa Muhammad” or “Yaa RasulAllah”. However, look what the Wahhabi scholar Albani had to say about this in the book Tawassul: Seeking a means of nearness to Allah By Nasir ud-Deen Albani, Al-Hidaayah publising. -p. 38:
“Imam Ahmad allowed tawwasul by means of the Messenger saaws alone,…However, WE (he means we as in WE i.e. the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, the Ahle Hadeeth) follow what is supported by proof and not the blind opinions of men.”

Notice carefully how Albani used the pronoun “We” distinctly to differ from Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal. Imaam Tahaawi and other great scholars of Islamic creed only used the pronoun “we” in reference to the Ahlus-Sunnah wal jamaa’ah and their methodlogy.

Therefore not only does Albani demonstrate to us that Wahhabis are on a different path than Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) but it also demonstrates to us that the deeper implications reflect the Khawwaarij theology at work by differing from the Imaams of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah. Albani’s statement therefore reflects nothing but bad opinion towards the Imaam. Especially given the fact that he describes Imaam Ahmad’s ijtihaad regarding this issue as a “blind opinion”.

Wahhabi’s should take special attention to what Imaam Tahaawi has to say in his al-Aqeedah ut-Tahaawiyah:

“The learned men of the first community and those that followed intheir footsteps – the people of virtue, the narrators of hadeeth, the jurists and analysts – must only be spoken about in the best way. Anyone who speaks ill of them, then he is on other than the path (of guidance)”. point no. 97

In other words, the whole Wahhabi madh-hab is flawed as it teaches that every scholar, common Muslim, dog cat and mouse is a Kaafir, and the whole world is on the path of idolatry all except for them.

I have had a huge response to the announcement of  the  forthcoming book “The Wahhabi Threat”, even to the point that people have offered lump sums to aid the release of this book worldwide! The book has not even been completed but yet it seems it is receiving success, as many people await.

I have to announce today the book is almost completed and is presently being arranged in different chapters and sections, however due to the size of the book, I have had to drop a couple of chapters that deal with ‘Aqeedah/theology which will be included in the second edition Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad.

I have also had to save a couple of chapters for the forthcoming book An-Nabi – The Prophet | Defending his integrity which inshaAllah will be finished by the end of next year [well I plan].

Before the release of the book “The Wahhabi Threat”, or even coinciding with it’s release, some free books [pdfs] will be released, such as “The Problems with Kitaab ut-Tawheed” and “Rad Alaa Kashf ush-Shubuhaat” and some others dealing with popular Wahhabi publications.

With all these said publications, here are just a few of the topics that will be dealt with

The Wahhabis Anthropomorphism and their Giving Allah a location
Accusations against the Ash’aris in claiming they believe the Qur’an is created
The Sunni position on calling upon the dead
Milaad un-Nabi being a linguistic bid’ah thus allowed
The the whole Wahhabi organization are the modern day Khawaarij
Wahhabis deem those who perform tawassul through the dead as Kuffar
Wahhabism promotes a Deeds based Salvation
Wahhabis are against madh-habs
Wahhabis are the true blind followers of Saudi shuyukh
Blanket Takfeer of the Wahhabi Aqeedah

and even more… so with the publications EVERYTHING will be covered.

Pray for the release of the publications

wa as-Salaam

Bid’ah According to the Understanding of Traditional Islam

The linguistic meaning of Bid’ah is anything new the previously did not exist. The Shari’ah terminology however means anything that has been introduced into the beliefs and actions of the Muslims that is in direct opposition to the Qur’an or the Sunnah, or anything that distorts the Sunnah or claims to be better than the Sunnah.

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) has cautioned us against us against any innovation [Bid'ah] that opposes the Qur’an or the Sunnah in the following two Ahaadeeth:

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said:

“Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours [i.e. the Islamic Creed] that is not a part of it, will have it rejected.” [1]

The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) also said:

“Every innovation is misguidance” [2]

These two Ahadeethth should be understood as every innovation introduced into the Islamic creed is misguidance. This is due to the fact that nobody can enlighten us more than the last Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) did. He was the last Prophet and the religion of all the Prophets was completed with him (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) says in the Qur’an:

“This Day have I perfected your Religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam As your religion” [3]

The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) taught us all we need to know about Allah (سبحانه وتعالى), and he also taught us our limits. Nobody can take away from what was revealed to him, nor can they add anything to it. Every creedal formulation unknown to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and his Companions that was later introduced is in the fire. This is confirmed from hadeeth of Mu’aawiyah Bin Abu Sufyaan (رضي الله عنه) who narrated that the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said:

“Those people of the book who came before you split into seventy two sects, and soon this religion [Islam] will split into seventy-three sects. Seventy-two of them will be in the fire and one will be in Paradise, and that is the Jamaa’ah” [4]

In a hadith of similar import, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) was asked who are the saved group? The Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) responded:

“Those who are upon that which me and my companions are upon today” [5]

Those that departed from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah only did so because they invented new beliefs. Creedal innovations must be avoided at all costs. One must always seek and then adhere to the known position of the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah.

There are also innovations of actions, however this is to be treated separately as some innovated actions have been encouraged if they are beneficial and do not contradict the Shari’ah at any point.

Imaam Shaafi’s (رحمه الله) understanding of the hadeeth[6] “Every innovation is misguidance [Kulla Bid'ah dalaalah] is enough to demonstrate this point. He said:

“There are two types of Innovation [bid'ah]: the praiseworthy and the blameworthy. Whatever is accordance with the Sunnah is praiseworthy and whatever vies with it is blameworthy…The new matters are of two: Whatever differs with the book of Allah, the Sunnah, the Athaar, or the Ijmaa’a, then that is an innovation of misguidance [bid'at ul-Dalaalah] and whatever new matter from amongst that which is good and does not differ with anything from that [Qur'an, Sunnah, Athaar, Ijmaa'a] then it is a new matter that is not blameworthy” [7]

Ibn ‘Abd us-Salaam (رحمه الله), a Shaafi’ scholar wrote in his Qawaa’id:

“Innovation is of five types:

1. Al-Waajibah: Such as the study of ‘Arabic syntax which helps to understand the speech of Allah and His Messenger because the preservation of the Shari’ah is obligatory [waajib] and nothing comes to us except by that being from the foremost rank of the waajib. Such is the much needed explanation of what is difficult to understand, the codification of the science of Fiqh [Usul ul-Fiqh] and working to distinguish between the authentic and rejected traditions.
2. Al-Muharramah: Whatever opposes the Sunnah such as the false innovated beliefs introduced by the Qadariyah, Murji’ah, and the Mushaabihah [and any other astray sect that has innovated something into the creed]
3. Al-Mandub: Every excellent goodness that was not established during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet [for example], the gathering for the Taraweeh prayers, the building of schools, spiritual retreats, speeches regarding the praiseworthy aspects of tassawuf… and anything else done purely seeking the Face of Allah.
4. Al-Mubah: Such as the shaking of hands after the Fajr and ‘Asr prayers, having an abundance of assorted foods, drinks, clothes, and a wide house…
5. However some of the mentioned Mubah things can also fall into the 5th category which is disliked [Makruh] or even not preferred [Khilaaf ul-Awlaa]” [8]

Imaam Abu Bakr al-Aajuri (رحمه الله), the great Shaafa’i scholar said in his Kitaab us-Shari’ah:

“Innovations [in the Creed] are misguidance, being that which opposes the Book and the Sunnah, and differs from the statements of the true believers.” [9]

Imaam ‘Abdur Rahmaan Ibn al-Jawzi [rahimhahullah] Tablees Iblees said in his Tablees Iblees:

“Bid’ah…refers to something which did not exist and was then invented. And, in most cases, innovations conflict with divine law by implying a need for human additions or deletions. Even an invented practice which did not contradict the Sharee’ah or imply any change was disliked by the majority of early scholars. They used to avoid any innovation, even though some types were allowable…It is thus, clear that that the early generation of Muslims cautiously avoided all innovations which even had the remotest connection to the religion for fear of changing the religion to the slightest degree. However, there were some new practices which did not contradict the Sharee’ah or change it; these practices were allowed” [10]

We can deduce from the given evidences that there are two types of bid’ah, praiseworthy and blameworthy. Let us now look at some praiseworthy innovations that have served great benefits for this Ummah.

One such innovation was the compilation of the Qur’an into the form of a book as done by Zaid ibn Thabit (رضي الله عنه), upon the suggestion of ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه), and command of Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه). Even though Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) was hesitant out of fear because this was something the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) did not do, ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه) encouraged Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) By Allah, it is good”. [11]

Another example of good innovation was the gathering together of the people to pray twenty units of Taraaweeh prayers behind one Imaam in the month of Ramadaan [12]. This was done by ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه) after he had noticed that the people had their own separate group prayers throughout the Masjid. Rather than have a divided Jamaa’ah reciting the Qur’an all at the same time, he knew it would be best to unify them behind one Imaam and one recitation. It was even said, “This is an excellent innovation”. [13]

The Issue of Milaad un-Nabi [the Birth of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)]

One innovation which is often attacked as being a bid’ah of deviation is the Milaad un-Nabi [the act of celebrating the birth of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)]. It cannot be considered as a bid’ah that opposes the Qur’an and the Sunnah as it has been proven [by scholars such as Imaam as-Suyuti] that it has roots in the Shari’ah as it is considered an act of loving the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Many people mistake this event as celebrating the Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم) birthday and upon this folly they wrongfully equate the celebration with the western tradition of celebrating birthdays. However, what the believers are doing is celebrating the birth and the life of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and they are simply rejoicing in the fact that Allah has sent him as a mercy to the universe. In such a pure intention, one will indeed find merits.

Imaam Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) attested to this fact when he said:

“…Likewise, what people have innovated by analogy with the Christians who celebrate the birth of Jesus (عليه السلام), or out of love for the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), and to honor him, may Allah reward them for this love and effort. Not for the innovation itself [but the love for the Prophet]…To celebrate and honor the birth of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) taking it as a honored season, as some people are doing, is good and in it there is a great reward, because of their good intentions in respecting the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم)” [14]

It is the opinion of Imaam Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) that there is great reward in celebrating the Holy Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم) birth, as it is an act of honoring him. Imaam Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) is not alone in this opinion. Imaam Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (رحمه الله) in his Lata’if al-Ma’arif [15] strongly encouraged people to gather in the month of Rabi` al-Awwal to learn about the Holy Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم) birth and life. Therefore, in the Shari’ah, the celebration of the Holy Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم) birth falls under the category of praiseworthy Bid’ah, as is recommended [mandub].

However, a word of caution concerning a danger that poses as a threat to the unity of the Muslims of today. This danger is the misuse of what is initially a well intended beautiful celebration, downgraded to a judgmental criterion to mete out the “true believers” from the “hypocrites”, the “Sunni Muslims” from the “deviants” where somebody who does not partake in the celebration is wrote of as a deviant. This is wrong due to the fact the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم), the Sahaabah, and the Tabi’een never practiced the Milaad in the form we find it today. The celebration of the Holy Prophet’s (صلى الله عليه وسلم) birth must not be made obligatory, or anyway binding upon the Muslims.
Let us take a lesson from history and Allah’s (سبحانه وتعالى) Speech in which He said:

“We sent after them, Our Messengers, and we sent Jesus, the son of Mary. We gave him the Injeel and We placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him. They have innovated Monasticism. We did not make it obligatory upon them. They invented it to please Allah thereby, but they did not observe it with right observance. We gave those who believe from amongst them their reward, but many from them were rebellious sinners” [16]

The first and foremost exegete, Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) has this to say in regards to this verse:

“The Christians built monasteries and cloisters to escape the persecution of Paul, the Jew. Allah did not make monasticism obligatory upon them. They did not innovate it but to seek the pleasure of Allah and had Allah enjoined it upon them they would not been able to give it’s due. Allah will reward the monks who did not contradict the religion of Jesus double for their faith and worship. Twenty Four of these monks resided in Yemen and when they heard of the Prophet they believed in him and joined his religion. However many of the monks were disbelievers, vying against the religion of Jesus” [17]

The quoted ayah from the Qur’an along with the explanation of Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه) shows us that Allah (سبحانه وتعالى) does indeed reward people for good innovation, however, when they start making it obligatory as something that has to be done in the religion then this becomes a punishable offense. Therefore anybody who celebrates the birth of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) must do so with a pure intention of loving the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) and should not make this binding upon other people.

[2] Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitaab us-Sunnah hadeeth no. 4607

[3] Surat ul-Maa’idah (5), ayah. 3

[4] Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitaab us Sunnah hadeeth no. 4597

[5] Tirmidhi hadeeth no. 2129

[6] You will tend to find that those that oppose this statement often fire back merely saying “the alleged statement of Imaam ash-Shaafi [Rahimahullah]’” without any shred of evidence to suggest that the statement of Imaam ash-Shaafi’ is fabricated, etc. They simply think they can refute the position of Imaam ash-Shaafi’ by peppering it with the description of being “alleged”. In-fact it is them that are doing the “alleging” – making allegations that scholars such as Imaam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani and the isnaad he quoted from contains a liar. Where are their proofs for such an implicit allegation?

[7] Fath ul-Baari, vol. 13, Kitaab us Sunnah, pp 370-372 Also mentioned by Imaam Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali is his Jami’ al-‘Ulum wal-Hikaam, commentary to hadeeth no. 28.

[8] Fath ul-Baari, vol. 13, Kitaab us Sunnah, pp 370-372

[9] The true believers referred to are the Imaams of the Muslims such as Imaam Maalik, Imaam Shaafi’, Sufyaan at-Thawri, Imaam al- Awzaa’i, Ibn al-Mubarak, Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal, al-Qaasin bin Salaam and whoever followed their way” See Kitaab ash-Shari’ah, vol. 1, p. 236

[10] Tablees Iblees, translated by Bilal Philips, p.21-23, al-Hidaayah Publishing. Arabic Edition, see p. 37 onwards What can we deduce from this statement?

1. Innovations conflict with divine law in most cases, but not in all cases.

2. Innovations that did not conflict with divine law were disliked, although not forbidden.

3. They were disliked by the majority of the Salaf, indicating that some from amongst the Salaf actually opined innovations that did not conflict with divine law as good [bid’ah hasanaah].

4. It is solely the choice of an individual Muslim to avoid “bid’ah hasanaah” as this is a valid position and there is also merit in avoiding innovations for the sake of Allah, a Muslim should not feel bound to practice such and such due to the customs of his people.

5. Those innovations that did not contradict the Shari’ah in any form or fashion were allowed, not forbidden.

6. When confronted with any practice seemingly new, we should ask ourselves “how does it contradict the Shari’ah?”

[11] Saheeh al-Bukhaari, English translation, vol. 6, hadeeth no. 509

[12] There is no dispute in the fact that there are twenty units for the Taraaweeh, for Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Deen has pointed out in his al-Mughni that the Sahaabah are in consensus about it. Those who go against the Ijmaa’a are not considered to be from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah as they violate the consensus and rebel against the Khalifah ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه)

[13] Saheeh al-Bukhaari, English Translation, vol. 3, hadeeth no. 227. Those who opine that the hadeeth “every bid’ah is misguidance” – kulla bid’ah dalaalah – is in its most absolute sense argue that ‘Umar’s [radiyAllahu anhu] statement “ni’imatul bida’atu hadhihi – This is an excellent innovation” refers to a linguistic innovation and is not really an innovation due to the fact it has roots in the Shari’ah. Our answer to this: Firstly, this argument negates the “Kullu – every” because if “kullu – every” is to be understood in its most absolute sense then the Prophet sal Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam would have also been speaking about such “linguistic bid’ahs”. Secondly, this very same argument of “linguistic bid’ah” can be used to permit Milaad un-Nabi as this also has its origins in the Shari’ah and thus returns to it. The Salafis usage of “linguistic bid’ah” is therefore fallacious, nothing more than a semantic somersault in which the feet land on the very same surface they sprung from. For the traditional correct understanding of linguistic bid’ah refer to Imaam Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s commentary hadeeth no. 28 in his Jami’ al-‘Ulum wal-Hikaam, who gives a fair, just and balanced understanding of how linguistic bid’ah should be understood, especially given the fact he quotes from the sources that some misguided Muslims would have us believe to be fabricated, etc.

[14] Iqtidaa al-Siraat ul-Mustaqeem, pgs. 294 – 297

[15] See Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s Lata’if al-Ma’arif, pp158-216

[16] Surat ul-Hadeed (57) ayah 27

[17] See Tanweer ul-Miqbaas [Tafseer Ibn Abbas]

The four traditional schools of fiqh have come under much attack in the past few hundred years by those who attempt to re-interpret traditional Islam and establish a new order. With the takeover of our holy lands and the wealth that the vampires gain by sucking of the blood of the earth, many books have been published and propagated for free promoting the false notion that the four traditional schools of fiqh are bid’ah and at worst, kufr and shirk.

This claim has arisen under the pretext that the adherents of the four traditional madh-habs are following “the rule of men” and their “blind opinions” and upon this premise, the adherents of madh-habs are likened to the Jews who took their Rabbis as Lords, and deemed as Mushriks. From such you will hear the repetitive slogan “Qur’an and Sunnah” which is very similar in nature to the Khawaarij cry “Judgement is for Allah only”.

What many people seem to misunderstand in this day is that the adherence to one of the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence does not merely consist of following an Imaam and everything what he has said hook line and sinker. Rather it is the following of a certain methodology that the Imaam has applied when deriving directly from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. All of the four Imaams had strict principles that are firmly grounded in a deep understanding of the texts they were deriving from.

The four Imaams were qualified experts who had mastered the ‘Arabic language, having memorised the seven qiraat to the very last letter, which prevented them from misinterpreting the Qur’an or the Sunnah linguistically.

They had profound knowledge of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, knowing its reason for revelation and exegesis, situation and circumstances concerning each ayah, and hadeeth.

They also knew very well how to classify and break down the isnaad [chain of transmission] of a hadeeth to know whether it is authentic, weak or fabricated, knowing the biographies, and reliability of all of the narrators mentioned in the chain. The Imaams, However, just had different principles in deriving from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Those who merely utter the catchphrase “Qur’an and Sunnah” belligerently belittle these very principles, suggesting that the following of qualified scholarship is the “rule of men” and at the most extreme case, shirk [polytheism].

We shall briefly look at the foundational principles that the four Imaams used to derive from the Sunnah.

The Principles of the Hanafi Madh-hab

Imaam Abu Hanifah (رحمه الله) and his board of qualified students would derive from the Qur’an and the Sunnah using the following principles:

1. The Qur’an: The Qur’an being Allah’s Speech was the first and foremost source. Any hadeeth found to be in contradiction with the Qur’an was therefore rejected.

2. The Sunnah: Imaam Abu Hanifah and his students had two conditions for the acceptability of a hadeeth. Firstly that it be authentic [Saheeh] and secondly that the hadeeth be widely known [Mash-hur].

3. The Ijmaa’a [Consensus]: If the Qur’an and the Sunnah was unclear on any matter, then before arriving at their own opinion they would look to the consensus of the companions [Sahaabah].

4. Invidual opinions: If there was not a consensus on a particular matter, then the Imaam and his students would look at each opinion of the Sahaabah and stick to that which seemed to be most accurate.

5. Qiyaas [Analogical Reasoning]: In absence of any of the mentioned above, Imaam Abu Hanifah (رحمه الله) and his students would then turn to their own ijtihaad. They would make an analogy, and derive a ruling based on something from the texts in which they could deduce a ruling from due to its similarity.

It is clearly seen from these following principles that those of the Hanafi madh-hab are far from blindly following the “opinion” of Imaam Abu Hanifah and his students. Clearly what the Hanafi madh-hab consists of is nothing but Qur’an and Sunnah.

The Principles of the Maaliki Madh-hab

Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله) lived in Madinah in the time of the Salaf, and he saw how the people of Madinah practiced Islam from a very young age. Imaam Maalik’s (رحمه الله) madh-hab heavily leans upon the amaal [actions] of the people of Madinah and has been coined as the madh-hab of the third Khalifah ‘Umar (رضي الله عنه). Imaam Maalik’s (رحمه الله) principles of deriving from the Qur’an and the Sunnah are as follows:

1. The Qur’an: The Qur’an being Allah’s Speech was the first and foremost source. Any hadeeth found to be in contradiction with the Qur’an was therefore rejected.

2. The Sunnah: Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله) would only refer to hadith that was Mutawatir to derive a ruling. More than often, he would only refer to Ahaadeeth from a certain chain of narrators which came to be known as the “golden chain”. However, the Imaam would give precedence to the actions of the people of Madinah if there seemed to be a conflict between a Saheeh hadeeth and the actions of the people of Madinah. Madinah, the home and heart of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) meant everything to Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله) and he showed great respect to the people of Madinah due to the Prophets words of goodness about them. The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) spent the last years of his life in Madinah and the people of Madinah are also blood relatives of the Sahaabah and from amongst the best of generations. Therefore, the Imaam adopted their way as thee Sunnah, and their knowledge as the secondary source of deriving the rulings for his madh-hab.

3. The Ijmaa’a [Consensus]: Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله), as a third principle would look to the ‘Ijmaa’a – the consensus of the Sahaabah on an issue.

4. Individual Opinions: If there was a lack of Ijmaa’a on an issue he would then look to the individual opinions of the Sahaabah. As seen from his Muwatta, where he has recorded the opinion of individual companions regarding many issues.

5. Qiyaas [Analogical Reasoning]: If the Imaam could not derive a ruling from any of the above, only then would he turn to analogical reasoning.

Again, it is clearly seen from these following principles that those of the Maaliki madh-hab are far from blindly following the “opinion” of Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله). Clearly the Maaliki madh-hab consists of is nothing but Qur’an and Sunnah.

The Principles of the Shafi’ Madh-hab

Imaam Shaafi’ (رحمه الله) was born in Sham, and from a young age journeyed to Madinah to study under the tutelage of Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله), and then later studied under the students of Imaam Abu Hanifah (رحمه الله) in Iraq. He had memorised the whole of Qur’an and memorized many Ahaadeeth, including the whole of Imaam Maalik’s (رحمه الله) al-Muwatta. Imaam Shaafi’ (رحمه الله) used the following principles whenever deriving a ruling:

1. The Qur’an: The Qur’an being Allah’s Speech was the first and foremost source. Any hadeeth found to be in contradiction with the Qur’an was therefore rejected.

2. The Sunnah: Imaam Shaafi’ (رحمه الله) is known for setting the standards for hadith criticism; he would only use Saheeh Ahaadeeth to derive a ruling on a particular issue.

3. The Ijmaa’a [Consensus]: Like the other Imaams, Imaam Shaafi’ (رحمه الله) would use the Ijmaa’a of the Sahaabah as a third principle.

4. Individual Opinions: Imaam Shaafi’ would then look to the individual opinions of the Sahaabah, and if they differed he would take the view closest to the Qur’an and the Sunnah.

5. Qiyaas [Analogical Reasoning]: the Imaam would use his qiyaas only as a last resort.

Again, it is clearly seen from these following principles that those of the Shaafi madh-hab are far from blindly following the “opinion” of Imaam Shaafi’ (رحمه الله) . Clearly the Shaafi’ madh-hab consists of is nothing but Qur’an and Sunnah.

The Principles of the Hanbali Madh-hab

Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) would use the following principals in their following order for deriving any ruling:

1. The Divine Texts –The Divine texts are two in number:
a. The Qur’an: The Qur’an being Allah’s Speech was the first and foremost source. Any hadeeth found to be in contradiction with the Qur’an was therefore rejected.
b. The Sunnah: Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) is said to have memorised a million of Ahaadeeth, however, he only used thirty thousand of them to compile his collection al-Musnad. Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) would only use Ahaadeeth with a reliable chain of narrators whenever deriving a ruling from the Sunnah.

2. The Ijmaa’a [The Consensus]: The ijmaa’a according to the school of Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) refers solely to the he unanimous agreement amongst the Sahaabah.

3. Individual Opinions If there was no consensus upon an issue, Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) would then establish a ruling upon each opinion and allow choice for the people to choose from whichever ruling they wanted to follow.

4.Mursal and Da’eef Ahaadeeth: In the absence of evidence from the Qur’an, saheeh or hasan Ahaadeeth, and ijmaa’a of the Sahaabah, Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) would then use a mursal or da’eef hadeeth before exercising any Qiyaas of his own. This is due to his statement in which he said the weak hadeeth is dearer to him than his own opinion.

5.Qiyaas – [Analogical Reasoning]: Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله) would only turn to his own analogical reasoning as a last resort.

Again, it is clearly seen from these following principles that those of the Hanbali madh-hab are far from blindly following the “opinion” of Imaam Ahmad Bin Hanbal (رحمه الله). Clearly the Hanbali madh-hab consists of is nothing but Qur’an and Sunnah.

Given the fact that all of the four Imaams had memorized the whole of the seven different recitations of the Qur’an, thousands of Ahaadeeth, etc and used the principles above to derive from the Qur’an and the Sunnah, and only resorted to analogical reasoning as the very last resort, how then can the accusers even dare to say that the people who follow the four schools are upon bid’ah, or at worse are committing kufr and shirk?

How can they even stand and say that this is not Qur’an and Sunnah? Those who belittle the expertise of the four Imaams in their ijtihaad actually violate the ijmaa’a of the Muslim scholars and also the creedal point stated by Imaam Tahaawi (رحمه الله) in which he said:

“The early scholars from before [the Salaf], and those after them, from the Taabi’een, being the people of knowledge, tradition, jurisprudence, etc, must not be mentioned except with beauty, and whomsoever mentions them with evilness, then he is upon a different path [other than the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah]”

Those who oppose the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah argue that following their qualified opinion is blind following, hence haraam; however, the people of the four Madh-habs are simply following the Salaf. If it is expected of common Muslims, and new Muslims alike, to dive headlong into the Qur’an and Sunnah and derive rulings for themselves, without the adequate prerequisites , then this would be in comparison to a common person to walk into a pharmacist and start mixing the medicines – in which they have no knowledge of – to cure himself.

Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله) is reported to have said “A Scholar should not derive rulings until he is competent to do so and given permission by scholars who precede his knowledge”.

This is concerning the scholar, let alone the layman with little knowledge. This la madh-hab attitude presents a clear and real danger. The calling away from the four legal schools of fiqh is the in fact a calling away from the Qur’an and the Sunnah and the Salaf, their consensus and expert opinion.

Those who oppose the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah in this regard should pay close attention to both Imaams Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) and his student Imaam Ibn Qayyum (رحمه الله). Have to say.

Imaam Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) said:

“That which the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah is agreed upon is that the Ahl us Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah are in consensus in the fact that ijtihaad and taqleed are totally permissible. They do not compel ijtihaad on everybody, thereby forbidding taqleed. Nor do they forbid ijtihaad upon the scholars, compelling taqleed upon them. They are in agreement that ijtihaad is permissible for the scholar of adequate qualification and likewise taqleed is permissible for the people incapable of performing ijtihaad”

Imaam Ibn Taymiyah’s student Imaam Ibn Qayyum (رحمه الله) concurs by saying:

“There is a taqleed that is waajib to follow and a taqleed that is forbidden. The taqleed that is obligatory is the taqleed of those who know better than us. This is where a person does not know the evidences from the Qur’an and the Sunnah regarding an issue. Such taqleed was performed by Imaam Shaafi where in places [of his texts] he clearly stated that he made taqleed of ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan etc, in a certain matter. Imaam Shaafi’ said about the Companions “their opinions are better than ours”

To add authentic Hanbali scholarship to the evidences given, we will quote from Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudaamah (رحمه الله), who said:

“Taqleed in branches of Shari’ah is permissible by ijmaa’a and there proof therein is the consensus”

The Differences in Fiqh Are a Mercy

The four schools and their differences are in fact a mercy for this community. We know this from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in which he said:

“The differences in my community is a Mercy”

This hadeeth is widely quoted by numerous outstanding scholars and agreed upon, mentioned in texts such as Imaam Muwaffaq ud-Din’s Lum’at ul-I’tiqaad, Imaam Suyuti’s Jazil al-Mawaahib fi-Ikhtilaaf al-Madhaahib; Imaam Abu Hanfiah’s al-Fiqh ul-Akbar; and Imaam Bayhaqi in his Madkhal. These are just few out of many.

Imaam Maalik (رحمه الله) said:

“Umar ibn ‘Abdul Aziz said: ‘I would not like it if the companions of Muhammad did not differ between themselves [on issues of fiqh], because if they did not differ, we would not have as much leeway.”

Imaam al-Bahaqi (رحمه الله) said:

“The differences between the Sahaabah are a mercy for the worshippers of Allah”

Even Imaam Ibn Taymiyah (رحمه الله) says:

“The Ijmaa’a of the Imaams is a definite proof and their differing is a vast mercy”. [He says further]: “If one does not follow any of the four Imaams, then he is upon misguidance, for the truth is not to be found outside of the four legal schools”

Therefore, the following of a madh-hab is not only permissible, but, it is a mercy for the community of the last Prophet and there is a big giant stamp of consensus on this issue, and those who differ are not deemed to be from the Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah, as they have rivalled themselves against the Ijmaa’a of the believers. To any such person, the evidences given should suffice in calling your heart back to the truth. And Indeed Allah is Most Merciful to you.

Madh-habism – Going to extremes in madh-habs

Let us turn to the claims of those who oppose madh-habs under the pretext they cause much fitnah and disunity. We often find this claim drifting about, whether it is two or three brothers raising their voices in the masjid, or the often repeated over used argument daily parroted on internet forums. Their argument is that the four madh-habs are four different sects, and to support this narrow view they will then present a string of ignorant statements made by an extreme Madhabists.

Madh-habism is when a person considers his madh-hab to be the most God-favoured one, and upon the most correct path, whilst he deems all the other madh-habs to be in error at some point. Unfortunately this mentality does exist amongst Muslims. You may hear chants being thrown around too loosely almost like football supporters waving the flag of their team. Chants of “Imaam-e Azaam” from a select few of Hanafis, “Amaal-e Madinah” from a select few of Malikis and “Imaam Ahl us-Sunnah” from rarity of the Hanbalis. Although these statements stand true respectfully in their own context, they do not serve as evidences that one madh-hab is better than another.

However does this give us enough reason to claim that all madh-habs are in error under the pretext that they are causing disunity to this Ummah?

Concerning this illness Imaam adh-Dhahabi (رحمه الله) said:

“Do not think that your madh-hab is the best and the one that is most beloved to Allah, for you have no proof of this. The Imaams [may Allah be pleased with them all] all follow great goodness; when they are right, they receive two rewards, and when they are wrong they shall receive one reward”

It has also been claimed that at one time there was four separate prayer niches around the Ka’bah in which the followers of each madh-hab would pray under. This accusation was concocted in an attempt to suggest the people of the four madh-habs refused to pray together even at the Ka’bah. This is simply not true. There were four pavilions, in which people would seek knowledge and fatawaas according to their madh-hab, and when the prayer times arrived they was put away. This was traditional Islam in practice. Classes being taught by the Ka’bah until a group of Muslims from the eastern region of the desert came and destroyed this tradition under the false pretext they was uniting the Ummah under one Imaam.

and certainly Allah knows best.

[UPDATE 23RD OF AUGUST 2010 MONDAY: NOTE, I MAY BE CHANGING MY VIEWS ON COCA COLA, SEE COMMENTS AND RESEARCH PENDING]

Have you ever been harassed by the self appointed Muslim police? Who intentionally seek the haraams.
Well, yes, uncomfortably I have had attempts made by brothers to harass me again and again.
Yes the one book scholars who become qualified after reading a single hadeeth in English, we know them well.
A brother cannot have a simple can of Coca Cola without the “astagfirullah” from the so righteous Ramadan saints of this community.

They claim that a. I and others are supporting Israel by purchasing Coca Cola, but they cannot brandish any proof, nor receipts that link from my pocket to the Israeli weapons killing the Palestinians, but yet I thought that we Muslims was meant to be the people of da’leel, evidences? Or do we solely rely on what we hear and what is spread around in these overnight rumor campaigns. O.k. your fizzy Cola company Saudia Pop may not have been successful, but is that any reason to spread rumors?

They claim that b. Coca Cola backwards spells in Arabic la Muhammad la Makkah. Let us put this nonsense to rest. If this was indeed ‘Arabic then

a. There is no alif on the laam, therefore it cannot be the laa nafi al-jins [the laa that negates] infact it would be the laam of possession or emphasis
b. Fair enough the coca spelt backwards can closely resemble the name of the Prophet Muhammad sal Allahu alayhi wasallam
c. On the Cola backwards we have another laam without the alif, which again would be the laam of possession and not the laa that negates
d. Those who still insist that the coca spells Muhammad will have to admit that the cola does not spell makkah due to the fact that Makkah would require a taa marbuta after the kaaf letter in Makkah, however what we find [if Arabic] are the very same two haruwf that spell the meem and the daal in coca backwards which people claim to be Muhammad’s name . thus it does not say Makkah.

You see these claims are baseless, and the work of those who want to delude people’s minds, sadly under an Islamic pretext.
An emphasis is placed on learning ‘Arabic grammar before issuing two pence fatawaa amongst the people. Sadly, many have been taken in by this cynical ignorance that plagues our time.

With that said, back to sipping my Coca Cola.

[UPDATE 23RD OF AUGUST 2010 MONDAY: NOTE, I MAY BE CHANGING MY VIEWS ON COCA COLA, SEE COMMENTS AND RESEARCH PENDING]