| |
 | Qur'an and Hadith |
| As-Sirah Biography |
| Muslims In Civilization |
| Articles |
| T T C Readings |
| imydp1428h.wordpress.com |
 | HOME |
|
UpComing Event International Youth Day 12/08/08 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
CEO:
IMYDP IMYDP
Mr.:
Lukyamuzi Ali
Members:
Bro. Waija Majaida
Abu BAkar Abdul Nasir
Aisha Nikuze
Aisha Pemi
Fatmah Majala
Umul Khair Abu Bakar
Bashir Gai
Rashidah Njolakwanji
Abu Bakr Umar
Banogoni Twaha Tom
Bint Jumah
Al-Amin Abdallahi
Ahmad Abu Bakar Aliyu
Mr.:
Shamsuddin Bolatito
Sis.:
Maryam Mputhi
Salamah Munirah
Fatmah Ramadhan
Members:
Mobrook Togo
 | THIS Adobe PDF file>MEMBERSHIP FORM |
| THIS Adobe PDF file>IMYDP PROSPECTUS |
T T C Readings
|
|
INTRODUCTION TO ETHICS OF DISAGREEMENT IN ISLAM Understanding Differences among Muslim jurists and scholars In clarifying some areas of Islam for Muslims, it is important to understand that the Qur’an and the Sunnah (way; or practices, manner and teachings) of the Prophet Muhammad (r) are the highest authorities on Islam and if anything contradicts them, it should be rejected as an unacceptable bid’a (innovation) or heresy.[1] However, provision exists for the interpretation and application of the Qur’an and Sunnah with the aid of reasoning to new or changing circumstances. This is called Ijtihad, and must be carried out by a person who is qualified to do so, called a Mujtahid.[2] In the Sunni world, many Mujtahidun (plural of Mujtahid) have risen to popular recognition, but none of them ever considered themselves as infallible. The four most prominent among the Sunni Mujtahidun are Imam Malik, Imam al-Shafi‘i, Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. They all (along with many others) are in agreement on the major tenets of Islam, such as the five pillars, articles of faith, number of raka‘ah for each obligatory Salat, etc.[3] However, there are some differences of opinion among the Mujtahidun on some aspects of Islam. This is natural and should be expected since the scope of Shari’ah allows for varying rulings in many cases; and since the Mujtahidun were all different human beings, they exercised the reasoning power Allah had given them in different ways to produce some divergent deductions. They also utilised different sources of information in deriving some legal precedents. For instance, some of them had access to some Ahadith (sayings or narrated actions of the Prophet) and Aathaar (sayings of the Companions or their Followers) that others did not have. In some cases, they were acquainted with contrasting hadith or had different ways of understanding the same verse or hadith[4], and this would influence the application of their reasoning.[5] A science of Islamic jurisprudence called Usul al-Fiqh (the ‘Roots’ of Jurisprudence) was developed to provide consistent methodologies for resolving ‘apparent contradictions’ in the Shari’ah’s source texts, while minimising mistakes in the derivation of rulings and ensuring fidelity to the ethos of Islam. Abdal Hakim Murad (1999) notes that: Like the other formal academic disciplines of Islam, this was not an innovation in the negative sense, but a working-out of principles already discernible in the time of the earliest Muslims. In time, each of the great interpretive traditions of Sunni Islam codified its own variation on these ‘roots’ (usul), thereby yielding in some cases different ‘branches’ (furu‘, i.e. specific rulings on practice).[6] It is important to stress, however, that the areas of similarities among the schools of Jurisprudence (singularly called Madhhab in Arabic) seriously outweigh the areas of differences, and a tradition of mutual respect between scholars of each school has prevailed throughout the centuries of Islamic history.[7] Some scholars suggest that individual Muslims should hold to the teaching of only one Mujtahid or follow a particular Madhhab. Some also suggest that one should accept the most popular opinion among a number of Mujtahidun, but that it should also be the opinion that is closest to the Qur’an or Sunnah.[8] In cases where the Qur’an and the Sunnah support both opposing opinions, one should, as the Prophet (r) advised, choose the one that he feels most sincerely and intuitively comfortable with, and is ready to meet Allah with on the Day of Judgment.[9] Situations may occur where none of the four great Schools of Jurisprudence have a clear ruling over a problem, thereby making it incumbent upon contemporary scholars to provide possible alternative answers based on the objectives of Shari’ah, available information on the issue at hand and juristic precedents on similar issues, as well as exposure to up-to-date research, and broad understanding of the societal impacts of various alternatives. It is pertinent that before young people embark on argument or debate over any issue, the relevance of the issue in question must be ascertained; in other words, ‘is it worth the argument?’ It is important that tolerance and respect is maintained for contrary opinions as valuable, most especially if they are derived from the Qur’an or the Prophet’s Sunnah. If an opinion is presented by somebody who has confidence in a particular Mujtahid who derives conclusions from the recognised methodology of a madhhab, such an opinion is not necessarily wrong.[10] It should be reiterated here that none of the past Mujtahidun considered themselves as infallible and they all held great respect and reverence for each other. As far as differences of opinion on jurisprudence are concerned, young people must remember that brotherhood (or the unity of Muslims) in Islam is “FARD” (i.e. obligatory). An obligatory aspect of Islam (Muslim brotherhood) must not be sacrificed for something less important (e.g. keeping hands either by the side or on the chest during Salat). It is therefore essential that legitimate differences of opinion should not be allowed to lead to disunity. New opinions from contemporary Mujtahidun that are not contrary to the Qur’an and Sunnah should not be considered as a threat to unity but should be assessed in accordance with the teaching of the Qur’an and Sunnah and their problem-solving capacity. Note: Module 102 of the Train-the-Trainers Course in Islam and Dialogue (also produced by the Da‘wah Institute of Nigeria) contains more discussion on the causes and types of disagreement among the Companions of the Prophet and early Muslim scholars, as well as the ethics of disagreement observed by them.[11] [1] For more on the subject of “Bid’a”, see Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Freedom of Expression in Islam (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Ilmiah Publishers, 1998), pp.131-143; Dr. Musharraf Hussain, “Is Every New Thing a Bid’a?”, Q-News, April Issue, 2001, p.24; Nuh Ha Mim Keller, The Concept of Bid’a in the Sharia of Islam (M.A.T. Papers, Cambridge: Muslim Academic Trust, 1999); See also Imam An-Nawawi, Tahdhib al-Asma wal-Lughat, Vol.3, pp.20-22; Al-‘Izz Ibn ‘Abd al-Salam, Al-Qawa‘id al-Kubra, Vol.2, pp.337-339; Imam Al-Ghazzali, Ihya Ulum al-Din, Vol.1, no.279; Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri, Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam, Vol.1, p.47; Imam Ash-Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar, Vol.4, p.60; Imam Ash-Shatibi, Al-I’tisam, Vol.2, pp.18-19, 63-68. [2] These qualifications include: “(a) mastery of the Arabic language, to minimise the possibility of misinterpreting Revelation on purely linguistic grounds; (b) a profound knowledge of the Koran and Sunnah and the circumstances surrounding the revelation of each verse and hadith, together with a full knowledge of the Koranic and hadith commentaries, and a control of all the interpretive techniques…; (c) knowledge of the specialised disciplines of hadith, such as the assessment of narrators and of the matn [content]; (d) knowledge of the views of the Companions, Followers and the great Imams, and of the positions and reasoning expounded in the textbooks of fiqh, combined with the knowledge of cases where a consensus (ijma‘) has been reached; (e) knowledge of the science of juridical analogy (qiyas), its types and conditions; (f) knowledge of one’s own society and of the public interest (maslaha); (g) knowing the general objectives (maqasid) of the Shari’ah; (h) a high degree of intelligence and personal piety, combined with the Islamic virtues of compassion, courtesy, and modesty.” (Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs, Cambridge: Muslim Academic Trust, 1999, pp.9-10). In the absence of an individual with all of the above qualifications, some Muslim communities and nations have established bodies or councils of scholars who collectively possess these qualities. Examples include the Research Council of Al-Azhar, the Islamic Fiqh Council of the Organisation of Islamic Conference, the Fiqh Council of North America, the European Council for Fatwa and Research, etc. [3] Shaykh Abdallah ibn Bayyah, Foundations of Our Methodology (7 audiotapes), trans. from Arabic by Hamza Yusuf (California, USA: Alhambra Productions, 2000); Shaykh Abdullah ibn Bayyah, The Legal Philosophy of Islam (13 audio CDs), trans. from Arabic by Hamza Yusuf (California, USA: Alhambra Productions, 2000). Shaykh Omer Bilmen explains, “The fundamentals of the religion, namely basic doctrine, the obligatory status of the forms of worship, and the ethical virtues, are the subject of universal agreement, an agreement to which everyone is religiously obliged to subscribe… But it is not a violation of any Islamic obligation for differences of opinion to exist concerning the furu‘ (branches) and juz’iyyat (secondary issues) which devolve from these basic principles. In fact, such differences are a necessary expression of the Divine wisdom.” (Bilmen, Hukuki Islamiyye ve Istilahati Fikhiyye Kamusu, Istanbul, 1949-1952, vol.1, p.329, quoted in Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs, op. cit., pp.28-29, n.69) [4] It was the practice of the Prophet (r) to issue verdicts according to the circumstances and conditions of the questioner. Hence, a variety of (different) rulings appear even in the narrations of hadith. To elaborate, Sheikh Muhammad Kandhlawi (2004) writes: Imam Muslim narrates on the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar that a blind Companion once approached Allah’s Messenger and submitted, “I do not have anyone to guide me to the mosque, please excuse my absence from the mosque for congregational prayers and permit me to perform my ritual prayers at home.” The Messenger of Allah granted him permission. However, when he learnt that this Companion lived in close proximity to the mosque and he was able to hear the adhan (call to prayer), the Messenger withdrew his permission and ordered the man to join the congregational prayers in the mosque. Conversely, in the case of Itbaan ibn Malik, Allah’s Messenger accepted his excuse of blindness and exempted him from attending the congregational salat… Once, Abu Bakr gave his entire wealth in charity and Allah’s Messenger accepted it. However, when certain other Companions decided to give their entire wealth in charity, Allah’s Messenger did not accept it. These are not isolated incidents. There are thousands of such incidents, which clearly demonstrate that the Messenger of Allah issued varying orders for different people… In cases like the above-mentioned incident, each narrator will narrate what he heard directly from Allah’s Messenger. The person who was granted permission to kiss his wife while fasting will obviously narrate that hugging and kissing does not nullify the fast. However, the other person will narrate his hadith in direct contrast to this and will vehemently deny the permissibility of kissing and hugging while fasting. This apparent contradiction between the two narrations is not only confined to two isolated narrators. In fact, there were always groups of students, devoted followers, enquirers, visitors, delegates, and others in the presence of Allah’s Messenger who would have heard these exchanges and related them according to their own understanding… …every gathering consisted of various people, the exempted as well as the healthy, the able-bodied as well as the weak. The law took into consideration the health of one and the weakness of the other. This is the reason for the apparent contradiction. One of the people in the gathering was so strong-hearted that even if he gave all his wealth in charity, there was no fear of him ever complaining. Allah’s Messenger was quite confident that no matter what calamity afflicted that particular person, he would become ever more engrossed in turning his attention toward Allah and totally at ease with the fate issued by Him. On the other hand, there were other personalities in the gathering upon whom he did not have such confidence. In fact, there was a fear of them exceeding even the boundaries of lamentation if they gave away all of their wealth in charity. Hence, he prohibited them from doing so… In short, the disparity of narrations stems from the disparity of conditions… Following such divergent narrations, the responsibility now falls upon the Companions, the Followers, and the mujtahid Imams to determine the source, occasion and correct juncture of each narration, and they should interpret each narration according to the demands of the occasion. (Sheikh al-Hadith Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi, The Differences of the Imams, transl. from Arabic by Mawlana Muhammad Kadwa, California, USA: White Thread Press, 2004, pp.10-14). [5] As explained in the footnote above, because the intricacies and conditions of a ruling were not always recorded, or may have been narrated differently by some Companions or Tabi‘un (their followers), different mujtahid scholars deduced what these conditions and underlying causes were and thus formulated a variety of rulings with respect to various circumstances. Differences also arose over what meaning certain words in the Qur’an and hadith held; whether certain injunctions were to be applied as general or specific rules; whether they were of legal or moral import; and, if legal, whether they were of a compulsory, recommended, permissible, discouraged, or prohibited nature (Ibid., pp.14-35). [6] Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs (Cambridge: Muslim Academic Trust, 1999), p.8 [7] Al-Dhahabi, for instance, advises, “Do not think that your own madhhab is best, and the one most beloved by Allah, for you have no proof of this. The Imams, may Allah be pleased with them, all follow great goodness; when they are right, they receive two rewards, and when they are wrong, they still receive one reward.” (Zaghal al-‘Ilm wa’l-Talab, p.15, quoted in Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti, Al-Lamadhhabiyya Akhtar Bid’a tuhaddid al-Shari’ah al-Islamiyya, 3rd edition, Beirut, 1404, p.81, cited in Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs, op. cit., pp.19-20, n.38). [8] It should be noted that neither of these options includes non-mujtahid Muslims deriving their own opinions from a small corpus of hadith and selected verses of the Qur’an, particularly if they are not well-grounded in classical Arabic vocabulary and grammer. An analogy may be drawn between the science of deriving Shari’ah rulings and the science of medicine: “If one’s child is seriously ill… does one look for oneself in the medical textbooks for the proper diagnosis and cure, or should one go to a trained medical practitioner?” (Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs, op. cit., p.14, quoting Shaykh Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti). This becomes especially dangerous for those whose first language is English because: For various reasons, including their great length, no more than ten of the basic hadith collections have been translated into English. There remain well over three hundred others, including such seminal works as the Musnad of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba, the Sahih of Ibn Khuzayma, the Mustadrak of al-Hakim, and many other multi-volume collections, which contain large numbers of sound hadiths which cannot be found in Bukhari, Muslim, or the other works that have so far been translated… To attempt to discern the Shari’a merely on the basis of the hadiths which have been translated will be to ignore and amputate much of the sunna, leading to serious distortions. Let me give just two examples of this. The Sunni Madhhabs, in their rules for the conduct of legal cases, lay down the principle that the canonical punishments (hudud) should not be applied in cases where there is the least ambiguity, and the qadi [judge] should actively strive to prove that such ambiguities exist. An amateur reading in the Sound Six collections will find no certain confirmation of this. But the madhhab ruling is based on a hadith recorded in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shayba, the Musnad of al-Harithi, and the Musnad of Musaddad ibn Musarhad… Another example is provided by the practice of istighfar [seeking forgiveness] for others during the Hajj. According to a hadith, “Forgiveness is granted to the Hajji, and to those for whom the Hajji prays.” This hadith is not related in any of the collections so far translated into English; but it is narrated, by a sound isnad [chain of narration], in many other collections, including Al-Mu’jam al-Saghir of al-Tabarani and the Musnad of al-Bazzar. (Ibid., pp.11-12). [9] Tirmidhi, no.842 in Alim 6.0: “Narrated Wabisah ibn Ma’bad: Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said, ‘Have you come to ask about righteousness and sin, Wabisah?’ When he replied that he had, he (the Messenger) joined his fingers and striking his breast with them said, ‘Ask yourself for a decision, ask your heart for a decision’ (saying it three times). ‘Righteousness is that which satisfies the soul and comforts the heart, but sin is that which disturbs the soul and troubles the heart, even if people give you a decision in its favour.’” This hadith is also recorded in Darimi; see Riyadh us-Saaliheen by Imam al-Nawawi, no.594, p.125. A similar hadith may be found in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Hadith 27 in Imam Nawawi’s 40 Ahadith. Another version reads: “Hasan ibn ‘Ali related: ‘I learnt from the Holy Prophet (r): “Give up that which raises doubt in your mind and adhere to that concerning which you have no doubt.”’” (Tirmidhi; quoted in Riyadh us-Saaliheen, no.596, p.125. Sheikh Muhammad Naasir al-Deen al-Albaanee records in his book, Saheeh al-Jaami’ as-Sagheer vol.1, p.321, a hadith narrated by Bukhari (also by Muslim and Ahmad) which states “Istaftah nafsuka wa in aftaaka al maftoon” (“Consult your conscience even though jurists/scholars may give youtheir legal opinions”). [10] Indeed, Sufyan al-Thawri is reported to have said, “If you see a man doing something over which there is a debate among the scholars, and which you yourself believe to be forbidden, you should not forbid him from doing it.” (Quoted in Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs, Cambridge: Muslim Academic Trust, 1999, p.13). Yahya ibn Sa’id, a great hadith narrator among the Followers of the Companions, also said, “The people of knowledge are a people of broadness. They continue to give fatwas which are different from each other, and no scholar reproaches another scholar for his opinion.” (Ibid., p.28, n.69) [11] For further reading on the topic of the Ethics of Disagreement in Islam as practiced by classical jurists, please consult Taha Jabir al-Alwani, The Ethics of Disagreement in Islam (Herndon, USA: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1993); Al-Qadi as-Safadi, The Mercy in the Difference of the Four Sunni Schools of Islamic Law. Trans. from Arabic by Aisha Bewley (London: Dar al-Taqwa Ltd., 2004); Abdal Hakim Murad, Understanding the Four Madhhabs (Cambridge: The Muslim Academic Trust, 1999); Tariq Ramadan, “Some General Rulings of Usul al-Fiqh” in To Be a European Muslim (Leicester, UK: The Islamic Foundation, 1999); Michael Mumisa, Islamic Law: Theory and Interpretation (Belstville, USA: Amana Publications, 2002); Shah Wali Allah al-Dihlawi, A Rational Explanation of Difference of Opinion in Fiqh. Trans. from Arabic by Dr. Muhammad Abdul Wahhab (London: Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd., 2003); Isam Ghanem, Outlines of Islamic Jurisprudence: Islamic Law in a Nutshell (Saudi Publishing & Distributing House, 1983); Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Ilmiah Publishers, 1999 edn.); Wael B. Hallaq, A History of Islamic Legal Theories: An Introduction to Sunni Usul al-Fiqh (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997); Al-Hassan al-Maghribi, Introduction to the Study of Hadith (n.p.: Roshnee Islamic School, 1994); Ahmad Zaki Hammad, Islamic Law: Understanding Juristic Differences (Indianapolis, USA: American Trust Publications, 1992).
