sahal Posted May 29, 2005 Title of Fatwa Ikhtilaaf (Juristic Difference): How and Why? Date of Fatwa 15/ October/ 2002 Date of Reply 15/ October/ 2002 Topic Of Fatwa Usool Al-Fiqh (Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence) Question of Fatwa Why did the four Imams differ on the same issue? What is the reason behind this difference? Is such difference good for other Muslims? Please enlighten me on this issue. Name of Mufti Group of Muftis In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All thanks and praise are due to Allah and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger. Dear questioner, Thanks a lot for the confidence you place in us and the interest you show in understanding the teachings of Islam. It is to be noted firstly that the differences between Muslim scholars are minor. It stems from the fact that they differ in understanding and interpretation of the Shar`i (legal) text. Each Imam understands the text or the daleel (legal proof or evidence) according to his knowledge and gives it an interpretation that copes with his ijtihad (juristic reasoning), a thing for which the Imam is well-qualified. In the meantime, while practicing ijtihad and deducing his opinions and forming his views according to his understanding of the text, the Imam never denies the views of other people. Imam Ash-Shafi`i is reported to have said: “My opinion is right and liable to be wrong. The opinions of others are mistaken and liable to be right.†Here, it is notable also that the difference in these minor issues among the four Imams and among other scholars does not render any of them outside the domain of Islam or render him subject to blame in the least. The incident of the Battle of Banu Quraizah witnessed a difference of opinion. When they were returning to Madinah after the battle of the Trench, the Companions heard the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, saying: “Let not any of you perform `Asr except in Banu Quraizah.†Some Companions understood the words to be a direct command to refrain from praying `Asr before reaching the dwellings of Bani Quraizah. Others understood it to be a command to hasten and reach the dwellings of Banu Quraizah as soon as possible. The former refrained from praying `Asr till they reached Banu Quraizah while the latter performed `Asr before getting there. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, did not rebuke either of the parties. Such an incident denotes that the matter was flexible and each party acted according to its understanding. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, rebuked neither party, signifying that a person who exerts efforts and reaches a decision that is based on legal texts is not to be rebuked for his understanding. Another important point is that the difference between scholars in such minor issues is really a sign of Allah’s mercy and His great bounty on people, since this facilitates matters for people and gives them a wide range of choices. In Surat Hud, we read: “And if thy Lord had willed, He verily would have made mankind one nation, yet they cease not differing. Save him on whom thy Lord hath mercy; and for that He did create them.†(Hud: 118-119) Elaborating on this issue, the prominent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi states the following: “The difference of Imams stems from the fact that the rulings of Islam are derived from religious texts. Naturally, people differ in their understanding of the texts; while some adhere to the letter of the text, others give priority to the significance and the wisdom lying behind the words. Among the main reasons of difference also is the fact that people are different in their inclinations. While some people hold a hard-line position and are strict in their way of thinking, others advocate easiness, without transgressing the limits, and stand for leniency. While Ibn `Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, used to be strict, Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, adopted easiness in some of his juristic opinions and each of them had his own understanding.†Shedding more light on the issue, we would like to cite for you the following from The Ethics of Disagreement in Islam by the prominent Muslim scholar Dr. Taha Jabir Al-`Alawani, president of the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences and president of the Fiqh Council of North America: “Allah Almighty has ordained differences between human beings in their mental capabilities, their languages, the color of their skin, and their perceptions and thoughts. All this naturally gives rise to a multiplicity and variety of opinions and judgments. If our languages, the color of our skins, and our outer appearances are signs of Allah’s creative power and wisdom; and if our minds, our mental capabilities, and the products of these minds are also signs of Allah and an indication of His consummate power; and if the populating of the universe, the beauty of being alive, and being able to live are also indications of Allah’s power, then we can justifiably say that none of this exquisite beauty and variety among human beings would have been possible if they had been created equal in every respect. Every created being indeed has its own unique characteristics. The differences which occurred among our forebears in early Muslim history and which continue to be with us are part of this natural manifestation of variety. Provided that differences do not exceed their limits, and provided they remain within the standard norms of ethics and proper behavior, this is a phenomenon that could prove to be positive and extremely beneficial.†Source: www.usc.edu Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sahal Posted May 29, 2005 Question Is it true that jurisprudential disagreement among scholars is a kind of mercy to laymen? If so, how come? Date 13/Apr/2005 Mufti Sheikh `Abdur-Rahman `Abdul-Khaliq In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger. Thanks very much for your important question, and we implore Allah earnestly to guide us to the best way through which we can understand the teachings of Islam and apply them in the best way in our daily lives. Disagreement among scholars regarding the interpretation of indefinite legal texts is something unavoidable due to the nature of such texts, the nature of those scholars, and the influence of the place and time factors. Such disagreement is not evil. Among the aspects of the advantages of such jurisprudential disagreement is that anyone who adopts any of the resultant different opinions is blameless, as long as the opinion is based on reasonable, acceptable jurisprudential disagreement. Responding to the question, Sheikh `Abdur-Rahman `Abdul-Khaliq, head of Heritage Establishment Committee in Kuwait, states the following: Jurisprudential disagreement used to be there among the Prophet’s Companions, their followers, and the best people of this nation. This is because such disagreement is unavoidable among those who are not impeccable. The only impeccable person was the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Everyone else is fallible, so they are all bound to err. Many of the early righteous predecessors stated that such permissible and acceptable jurisprudential disagreement represents a kind of mercy to laymen as follows: 1. Mercy represented in divine pardon: Almighty Allah states in the Qur’an that the believers say: (Our Lord! Condemn us not if we forget, or miss the mark!) (Al-Baqarah 2: 286). In addition, it is stated in the Sahih of Al-Bukhari that after Allah revealed this verse and the Prophet’s Companions recited it, Allah said in reply, “I will not (condemn you).†Thus, the jurist who errs is excused; rather, he is rewarded for his effort, as it is stated in the two authentic books of Hadith that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “During judging a case, if the judge exerts an effort to reach the right judgment and he reaches it, he gets two rewards; and if he exerts an effort to reach the right judgment but he errs, he gets one reward†(Reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim). 2. Mercy represented in the permissibility of maintaining a different jurisprudential opinion as stated by many eminent jurisprudents: Ibn Qudamah (may Allah bless his soul) stated in the introduction of his book Al-Mughni, “To commence, Allah, by His mercy and might, made the early scholars of this nation prominent figures, through which He set the rules of Islam and clarified the problematic rulings. Thus, their agreement is a decisive evidence, and their disagreement is a great mercy.†Likewise, the eminent Imam Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with them all), said, “Allah bestowed a benefit through the disagreement of opinion among the Prophet’s Companions as regards their deeds. Whoever follows the opinion of any of them (the Companions) will surely find that it involves ease and that there was someone better than himself who maintained such an opinion†(See Jami` Bayan Al-`Ilm Wafadlih). Moreover, in his book entitled Jami` Bayan Al-`Ilm Wafadlih, Ibn `Abdul-Barr stated, “`Umar ibn `Abdul-`Aziz and Al-Qasim ibn Muhammad once met and kept recalling the hadiths of the Prophet. In doing so, `Umar’s citations were contradictory to those of Al-Qasim, which made the latter upset. `Umar noticed that and said to him, ‘Do not be (upset), for what pleases me is that I get the best of camels (great rewards) through their (the Companions’) disagreement.’†Furthermore, Ibn Taymiyah, the Sheikh of Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) stated, "A man composed a book on jurisprudential disagreement, so Imam Ahmad said to him, ‘Do not call it the Book on Disagreement, but call it the Book on Ease." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
