Disclaimer: I personally wrote all these, not an infallible Shia Imam, so feel free to criticize. The lack of sources is due to the fact that I wrote this from the notes I took when I was having an Usool class.
Why Do We Follow Madhabs in the First Place?
There are two things that are narrated from the salaf to us. One is the text (the Quran and the Hadith) and the other is the meaning (of these texts). While the narrated text is pretty much solid data available in the Quran and the Hadith (especially after the canonization of books like Bukhari there is not much uncertainty regarding what is saheeh and not, if it’s in these books its saheeh if not it’s not) the meaning is not available in such solid terms. We can imagine the religion we follow to be consisting of two parts, text and meaning. Just like how the textual religion is narrated and preserved in hadith isnaads, the meaning of religion is preserved through the tradition of madhabs. We can follow Imam Abu Hanifa's madhab because we believe that it is, in fact, just a narration of the meaning of religion through the Prophet ﷺ -> Ibn Mas'ood -> 'Alqama -> an-Nakha'i -> Hammad b. Abi Sulayman -> Abu Hanifa -> the rest of the generations in the madhab. So we follow the madhabs because they give us the understanding of the salaf.
Why Would We Have to Follow a Madhab?
The meanings that exist in our minds are abstract and they need to be conveyed through some tangible means. This is the purpose of words and speech. There is a famous saying in Arabic “The words are containers that carry the meanings.” Meaning is like water, hard to give to someone if you don’t have a proper container for it. So far we can understand that the purpose of text is to convey meaning. If text is for meaning, this shows that the meaning is the ultimate desired thing. If we apply this to religion, we see that there are some textual sources that constitute the core and everyone is to understand them and live them. So we are to follow the texts. But as it has been explained the text are only means. Therefore, we are not supposed to follow the texts, but we are supposed to follow the meanings. After this has been established we need come to the million-dollar question: How?
The only way to assure that we follow the correct meaning is to assure that we understand the text correctly. For the Sahaba (r.a.) this was a simple task. They would go to the Prophet ﷺ and ask him what is actually meant in the verse revealed or what he just said. For us things are a bit more complicated. The Prophet ﷺ has passed away (ولو كان في الدنيا بقاء * لكان رسول الله حيا مخلدا). In this situation what are we to do? The only route available to us is to ask those who asked the Prophet ﷺ. For us this is the scholars that are part of the tradition of a madhab. As I have explained in the beginning of this writing using the Hanafi madhab as an example a madhab is nothing but a tradition in which the meaning of religion is preserved.
The proof of the Hanafi madhab being a tradition as described is readily available. When we examine the views of Hammad b. Ebî Sulayman from the work of Dr. Muhammad Rawas Kalaji we see that Abu Hanifa’s views align with Hammad’s views %84 of the time. And if we further examine the similarity between Abu Hanifa’s views and an-Nakhai’s views we see that their views are %75 similar. The gradual change in some rulings can be attributed to the flexibility of fiqh. But other than that it is very clear that Abu Hanifa didn’t invent meanings for the text he had. The text and the meaning was transmitted to him. The development of the madhab has also followed on in a similar way. If the Hanafi madhab is a tradition, then why has it been attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa and not those before him or after him? This is probably related to the vast expansion the Hanafi tradition received during the time of Abu Hanifa and his direct students. The madhab became famous with Abu Hanifa, so despite not “belonging” to him it came to be identified with his name.
If we return to the question “Why do we have to follow a madhab?”, now the answer is clear. We have to follow a madhab because they are our only path to the Prophet ﷺ. By asking a scholar of the madhab we are in fact asking someone who has asked the Prophet ﷺ.
Why Only Four Madhabs?
As we have mentioned, we have to follow a madhab because they are our path to the Prophet, but why do we need to follow one of these four madhabs? For example, can’t we follow the madhab of Sufyan ath-Thawri who was as much a mujtahid as Imam Abu Hanifa? No, we cannot follow any madhabs other than the four sunni madhabs that are alive today, the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii and Hanbali madhabs. The key word in understanding this necessity is “alive”. As we have mentioned, following a madhab is following a meaning. Often the relation between what is said/done and what is meant is indirect and requires the full attention of the addressee. Things that need to be kept in mind when trying to understanding what is being said and done include things like the context, mimics and jests and full knowledge of the character of the speaker and are not confined by them. If we name the total of these secondary signs that affect the meaning, position it will serve to simplify the discussion. Complete knowledge of the position can only be gained by being in the position of the addressee (but being of the position of the addressee does not guarantee that you will understand things as they are). The way this process has been emulated generation after generation in the Islamic civilization is through the madhabs. As such following Sufyan ath-Thawri’s madhab becomes an impossibility because this process is no longer active. The only way we can know of Sufyan ath-Thawri’s views is through text, and text is not what we are supposed to follow. We are supposed to follow the living Islam (meaning).
So, what is the Purpose for Usool al-Fiqh Then?
Often we see Usool al-Fiqh being defined as the methodology of deriving rulings from text. But as explained this is not where fiqh comes from. Fiqh comes from tradition. Imam Abu Hanifa didn’t derive his rulings from text, he derived it from the meaning of religion that was narrated to him. Usool al-Fiqh as a subject became relevant after Imam Shafii wrote his book ar-Risala. We need to ask the question “Did he write Usool so that people can derive rulings from the text?” The answer is no. He wrote his Usool in response to the need to provide a methodological framework to discern between the weak views and the strong views. The purpose of Usool al-Fiqh is not to produce new rulings but it is to provide proof for rulings. The rules in Usool al-Fiqh are meant to define limits to what can be accepted and what cannot be accepted. For example, the rules regarding the imperative tense will not give you the meaning of a text containing a command, they will give you the possible meanings. Knowing the meaning is still vastly reliant on knowing the position of said text containing the command. As such the purpose for Usool al-Fiqh is to provide a methodological framework to be able to decide what is acceptable (valid) and not (invalid).
In Conclusion
Following one madhab amongst the four living Sunni madhabs is an obligation for Muslims and any meaning extracted from text will not have any binding authority over anyone if it doesn’t refer to any of the four madhabs. If you have any notions that contradict the views found in the traditions of madhabs, the meaning you understood is not to be followed even if there is a text you can point to.
[link] [comments]
from Islam http://ift.tt/2BRe5dV
No comments:
Post a Comment