Their consensus is a definitive proof, and their divergence of opinion is a vast mercy. 1821
إجْمَاعُهُمْ حُجَّةٌ قَاطِعَةٌ وَاخْتِلافُهُمْ رَحْمَةٌ وَاسِعَةٌ.
Importance of Prayer & Ruling of its Abandonment
Facing the Qiblah & Intention in the Prayer
Etiquettes of Walking to Prayer and its Description
Description of Prayer Continued
Description of Prayer Continued
Description of Prayer Continued
Pillars and Mandatory Acts of Prayer
Two Prostrations of Forgetfulness
Supererogatory (Voluntary) Prayers
Supererogatory (Voluntary) Prayers Continued
Times of Prohibition of (Supererogatory) Prayer
Congregational Prayers & Latecomers
Jumu'ah (Congregational Friday) Prayer
Introduction & Commercial and Selling
Selling of Primary & Secondary Commodities
Cancellation Options in Transactions
Cancellation Options Continued
Debt Transference & Guarantor-ship
Mortgaging & Security Deposits
Partnership & Companies Continued
Reviving Barren Lands & Per-Job Wage
Lost and Found Property & Foundlings
Prize Money & Deposits for Safekeeping
Appendix 10: Flexibilities in Islamic Legal Theory – Tanaqqul, Takhayyur, and Talfeeq and the Usefulness of Weak Positions
Imam Ibn Taymiyah said of earlier scholars:
Their consensus is a definitive proof, and their divergence of opinion is a vast mercy. 1821
إجْمَاعُهُمْ حُجَّةٌ قَاطِعَةٌ وَاخْتِلافُهُمْ رَحْمَةٌ وَاسِعَةٌ.
The vastness of our fiqhi legacy and the many disagreements among the different madh-habs and independent mujtahideen cause frustration to some students of fiqh and junior fuqahâ’. In fact, this is a major source of flexibility, which enables renewal. Many followers of the four most reputable schools allowed tanaqqul (transfer) from one madh-hab to another, even for the public, 1822 takhayyur (choosing different experts), and talfeeq (patching together positions) from different madh-habs (something done frequently in contemporary fiqh assemblies by scholars who are otherwise wholly committed to their own madh-habs).
Concerning the concept of tanaqqul from one madh-hab to another, Imam Ibn Nujaym al-Ḥanafi wrote:
It is permissible to follow any mujtahid one pleases, even after the codification of the madh-habs as is the case today. It is also permissible for one to transfer from his madh-hab, but he should not seek out concessions (rukhaṣ) – but if he did, would he be a fâsiq (deviant)? [There are] two views. The most eminent view, according to the commentator: [he is] not, and Allah knows best. In the
1821. Majmoo‘ al-Fatâwâ, 30/80. The hadith cited in this regard is not authentic.
1822. at-Taqreer wat-Taḥbeer ‘alâ Taḥreer al-Kamâl, 3/352.
beginning of at-Tatârkhaniyah, [the author] wrote two chapters on religious decrees; the summary of the first is that Abu Yusuf said that issuing a fatwa is permissible only for a mujtahid, while Muhammad permitted it for anyone whose correct views are more numerous than his errors. It is reported from al-Iskâf that the most knowledgeable person in a town has no excuse to avoid [issuing fatwas]. 1823
Imam Zakariyâ al-Anṣâri ash-Shâfi‘i said:
It is permissible for the non-mujtahid “to follow any mujtahid he chooses, if the madh-habs are codified like they are today.” Then they may follow each of them in some issues, for the Companions used to ask someone one time and someone else another time, without any denunciation [of this practice by any of them]. “He may also transfer from his madh-hab” to another one, whether or not we said he is bound to seek the more knowledgeable or we allowed him to choose any of them, as when he follows someone in their ijtihâd concerning the qibla sometimes and [follows] someone else at other times. However, he may not seek out the concessions, for selecting them leads to the compromise of one’s religious dutifulness. “If he still chose them from the different madh-habs, would he become a fâsiq? [There are] two views. The more esteemed one is no.” This is different from one who selects them from the madh-habs that have not been documented; if he was in the early era, he would certainly
1823. al-Baḥr ar-Râ’iq, 6/292; at-Taqreer wal-Taḥbeer, 3/352.
not be a deviant fâsiq, but if he is from the latter ages, it appears that he would become a fâsiq for sure. 1824
The Ḥanbalis agree with this concept, and Abu al-Khaṭṭâb al-Kallodhani (may Allah have mercy on him) even cites a consensus on it. 1825 Al-Qâḍi Abu Ya‘lâ (may Allah have mercy on him) cites several reports from Aḥmad allowing his disciples, and others who asked him, to find concessions in fatwas by other scholars, referring them at times to ‘Abdul-Wahhâb al-Warrâq, Is-ḥâq, or Abu Thawr, and even to locations where scholars gathered so that they could ask any of them. 1826 It is obvious that to Abu Ya‘lâ (d. 458 AH), the concept was not limited to the four madh-habs.
We may even adopt an opinion that we consider weak, in order to relieve some hardship, provided that it meets certain conditions, as mentioned in the following verses by the Mâliki author of Marâqi as-Su‘ood:
Finally, because the pressing need or necessity may compel people to act upon such [weak positions] if they are not too weak,
and their attribution [to a mujtahid] was established, and the one under duress is certain of the necessity.
1827
وكَوْنِهِ يُلْــجى إليهِ الضَّرَرُ إنْ كانَ لَمْ يَشْتَــدّ فِيهِ الخَوَرُ وثَبَتَ العَــزْوُ وقَـدْ تَحَقَّقَا ضُرّاً مَن الضُّرُّ بِهِ تَعَلَّــــقَا
1824. Zakariyâ al-Anṣâri. Asnâ al-Maṭâlib fee Sharḥ Rawḍ aṭ-Ṭâlib. Cairo: Dâr al-Kitâb al-Islâmi, 4/286.
1825. at-Tamheed by al-Kallodhani, 4/334.
1826. al-‘Uddah fee Uṣool al-Fiqh by Abu Ya‘lâ al-Farrâ’, 5/1571. Retrieved from Shâmilah [computer software].
1827. Nashr al-Bunood ‘alâ Marâqi as-Su‘ood by ‘Abdullâh ibn Ibrâheem al-‘Alawi, 2/270-271. Retrieved from Shâmilah [computer software].
One may add two more conditions that al-Qarâfi quoted from previous Mâliki scholars:
1- That one does not seek out concessions wherever they are.
This may be part of the condition mentioned above, which is the presence of a need. Thus, one may not screen all the madh-habs of the previous scholars in order to take the easiest position among them concerning every matter. This is the position of the vast majority of scholars, but a minority allowed it. It is also attributed it to ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul-‘Azeez, who said:
I would not like it if the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (SA) had not differed, for if they had agreed on one opinion, people would be restricted. They (the Companions) are the leaders to be followed, and if a person were to adopt the opinion of one of them, he would not be blameworthy. 1828
وكَوْنِهِ يُلْــجى إليهِ الضَّرَرُ إنْ كانَ لَمْ يَشْتَــدّ فِيهِ الخَوَرُ مَا أُحِبُّ أَنَّ أَصْحَابَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمْ يَخْتَلِفُوا؛ لأَنَّهُ لَوْ كَانُوا قَوْلا وَاحِدًا كَانَ النَّاسُ فِي ضِيقٍ وَإِنَّهُمْ أَئِمَّةٌ يُقْتَدَى بِهِمْ وَلَوْ أَخَذَ رَجُلٌ بِقَوْلِ أَحَدِهِمْ كَانَ فِي سَعَةٍ
However, the vast majority of scholars qualify that statement to mean that one may take an easier position of a qualified mujtahid if it spares him or her some hardship, but one may not simply select every easy position he or she can find.
2- That one does not compose a position that is rejected by consensus. (This applies mostly to talfeeq.)
Al-Qarâfi reported approvingly from az-Zanâti that the three conditions to make permissible a transfer from one madh-hab to another are that: 1) the opinions of different madh-habs are not patched together in a way that
1828. Jâmi‘ Bayân al-‘Ilm wa Faḍlih by Ibn ‘Abdul-Barr, 2/901. Retrieved from Shâmilah [computer software].
produces a position that has been rejected by consensus, 2) the person engaging in this talfeeq believes in the virtue of the mujtahid being followed, and 3) concessions are not sought out from among all the madh-habs. Al-Qarâfi commented that the concessions that cannot be adopted are those that are unfounded, to the extent that they may be revoked even if issued by a judge. 1829
Also, talfeeq that results in a position rejected by all the integrated madh-habs should only be forbidden in certain cases. If one engages in taqleed (following) of one imam for some clauses of a sales transaction and another imam for other clauses, the contract should still be valid unless the clauses are mutually exclusive or lead to inequity or deviation that is repugnant to the maqâṣid (objectives) of the Sharia. This is based on the stronger position, which is that the ‘ammi (layperson) has no madh-hab. 1830 An example of forbidden talfeeq is when an individual marries without witnesses, citing Imam Mâlik, and without announcing it, citing the majority. This marriage is a secretive relationship that is considered unlawful by all. Another example is when one applies different standards to oneself than to others, such as invoking the right to preemption against one of his neighbors but then refusing to honor that right if another neighbor attempts to use it against him.
It should be obvious that these examples are different from the case of a layperson who asks two different muftis about two different matters pertaining to wuḍoo’; the Shâfi‘i mufti answers that wiping any part of the
1829. Sharḥ Tanqeeḥ al-Fuṣool, p. 432.
1830. See az-Zarkashi, al-Baḥr al-Muḥeeṭ, 8/375, Dâr al-Kutbi, 1997. Retrieved from Shâmilah [computer software]; Hâshiyat Ibn ‘Âbideen, 2nd ed., by Ibn ‘Âbideen, Beirut: Dâr al-Fikr, 1/48.
hair is sufficient, and the Ḥanafi mufti answers that a man touching a woman without lust is not a nullifier. If he makes wuḍoo’ according to the Shâfi‘i position and then touches a woman without lust, he will have no wuḍoo’ according to any of the four. 1831 Despite that, it seems that his wuḍoo’ should still be valid 1832 because these issues are neither interdependent nor mutually exclusive. Although the majority of scholars after the tenth century prevented this type of talfeeq, we do not find it mentioned before the seventh century. 1833 Also, it is the consensus of the Companions that someone who had asked Abu Bakr and ‘Umar about one issue could ask Mu‘âdh, Abu Hurayrah, or someone else about another issue. 1834They never restricted this to asking about other issues that do not pertain to the same act of worship. Without the permission of regulated talfeeq, many modern contracts would not be permissible according to any single madh-hab. A great deal of hardship would ensue and the vastness of our fiqhi legacy would lose an important feature of its flexibility and resilience.
One may add another condition here: that the follower of the weaker position must not have certain knowledge of its faultiness. Imam ash-Shâfi‘i stated:
1831. Because according to ash-Shâfi‘i, touching a woman nullifies the wuḍoo’, and according to the other madh-habs, the Shâfi‘i wuḍoo’ (wiping only one hair) does not count.
1832. See Wahbah az-Zuḥayli. Al-Fiqh al-Islâmi wa Adillatuhu. Damascus: Dâr al-Fikr, 1/106-107.
1833. Wahbah az-Zuḥayli. Al-Fiqh al-Islâmi wa Adillatuhu. Damascus: Dâr al-Fikr, 1/106-107.
1834. Sharḥ Tanqeeḥ al-Fuṣool, p. 432.
The Muslims have unanimously agreed that if the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (SA) becomes apparent to someone, it becomes impermissible for him to abandon it for the statement of anyone else, regardless of who that is. 1835
أَجْمَعَ المُسلِمُونَ عَلَى أَنَّ مَن استَبَانَت لَهُ سُنَّةٌ رَسُولِ اللهِ لَم يَكُن لَهُ أَن يَدَعَهَا لقَولِ أحَدٍ مِنَ النَّاسِ.
Although this statement referred to scholars, the same applies to anyone who is certain that a position is erroneousness. 1836 Wâbiṣah ibn Ma‘bad (ra) said, “I came to the Messenger of Allah (SA), and he said, ‘You have come to ask about righteousness.’ I replied, ‘Yes.’ He said:
‘Consult your heart. Righteousness is that about which the soul feels at ease and the heart feels tranquil. And ithm (sin) is that which wavers in the soul and causes uneasiness in the breast, even though people have repeatedly given you their legal opinion.’” 1837
اسْتَفْتِ قَلْبَكَ؛ الْبِرُّ مَا اطْمَأنَّتْ إِلَيْهِ النَّفْسُ وَاطْمَأنَّ إِلَيْهِ الْقَلْبُ، وَالإِثْمُ مَا حَاكَ فِي النَّفْسِ وَتَرَدَّدَ فِي الصَّدْرِ وَإِنْ أَفْتَاكَ النَّاسُ وَأَفْتَوْكَ
1835. I‘lâm al-Muwaqqi‘een, 1/6.
1836. See at-Taqreer wat-Taḥbeer, 3/352.
1837. A reliable hadith reported by Imam Aḥmad and by ad-Dârimi with a good chain (sunnah.com/nawawi40/27).
( Page : no 192)