Lesson Six: The Four Great Imams Course

Allah be praised, Lord of all worlds.

And the most perfect prayers and peace upon the one sent as mercy to the worlds.

And upon his family and Companions all.

To proceed, we continue this course.

I ask Allah ﷻ to make it blessed.

and benefit us by it here and in the Hereafter.

I had arranged the course.

so that we would finish studying the imams and learn from their lives.

and their wise sayings, in two days.

and that in the next two days we would move to foundational issues.

which are greatly needed regarding the fiqh of the four imams.

such as the issue of following a madhhab and one's stance on it.

and the issue of the relationship between imams' fiqh and fiqh of evidence.

And also the issue of why scholars differ.

What makes a jurist go against a hadith, as it appears to us?

What excuses and reasons lead to that?

I had planned, Allah willing, to make this for the next two days.

Allah ﷻ blessed us, so we finished what we intended.

about the imams' biographies, some words and maxims, as planned.

Though earlier I had thought we would finish after Isha prayer.

But Allah ﷻ willed that we finish, with some brevity before Isha prayer.

Therefore, we will devote this session to answering the questions.

And, Allah willing, in the next two days, if we can shorten things somewhat.

we can make more time for questions in the last two days, or the last day.

So we will do that, if Allah ﷻ wills.

because I was told by some brothers.

that the brothers want room left for answering questions.

So we will start answering the brothers' questions.

In a session, or in this session.

And we ask Allah ﷻ for success and right guidance.

May Allah do good to you, our shaykh.

The questioner asks: What is our view of followers of the four madhhabs?

but they differ from them in creed?

Praise be to Allah.

The four imams.

They are among the great scholars of Islam.

They were given the banner of leadership in fiqh.

There is no doubt that the four imams were followed by many followers.

And those followers are not all upon one way.

There is no madhhab except that among its scholars are those.

who served the Salafi creed.

He made efforts in establishing tawhid.

as found in the Book and the Sunnah.

and as the Ummah's Salaf agreed.

and they made efforts against shirk practices and bid'ahs.

Whoever reads the biographies of each madhhab's scholars knows this.

Likewise, there are scholars from one of the four madhhabs.

Some followed the way of many later scholars in creed.

in matters where they opposed the creed of the righteous Salaf (RA).

One of the clearest examples is interpreting the Attributes.

This method—I mean interpreting the Attributes—is newly invented.

Its adherents know it is invented.

And they know it is not the path of the Salaf.

That is why they say:

"The Salaf's way is safer," "the Khalaf's more learned and wiser."

This shows they knew the Salaf's creed differed from that of later ones.

Though they did not know the Salaf's way at all.

They thought the Salaf's way was tafwid of the attributes, the safer way.

The Salaf's way is more learned, wiser, safer—Allah's straight way.

It is firm knowledge, agreed on by the early generations, without dispute.

So any speech that opposes what the Salaf were upon.

has no value, for it opposes the settled, clear consensus.

As for those followers who took the path of the later scholars.

and followed their way, they have opposed the Salaf.

They opposed what the Salaf agreed on, as they did the imams.

For the four imams were upon the Salaf's creed, save a few issues.

Concerning Imam Abu Hanifa RH, he erred in them.

The truth has more right to be followed.

As for matters of creed, the three imams are agreed on what the Salaf held.

And Imam Abu Hanifa RH is with them in all creed matters, save a few.

Abu Hanifa RH had statements in them that differed from the righteous Salaf.

We already indicated our stance on them, or on Abu Hanifa RH, earlier.

Such people, in fiqh, say: I am Hanafi in fiqh.

I am Maliki in fiqh. I am Shafi'i in fiqh.

I am Hanbali in fiqh-though this is rare among Hanbalis-Ash'ari in creed.

So he knows he is opposing the Imam.

And he does not attribute himself to the Imam in creed.

The Imams' texts on creed are very clear. Yet some reinterpreted them.

the Imams' words to fit the creed they adopted.

And they went to great extremes in doing so.

So we say: those followers who opposed the Salaf's creed.

and ascribed themselves to the four Imams in fiqh.

have opposed what the Salaf agreed on and what the four Imams followed.

They did not follow their way in creed.

These followers do not harm the Imams by what they themselves followed.

For this, as we said, is contrary to what the Imams held.

and what the ummah's early generations held, RA. It is our duty.

to clarify the creed of the salaf and be active in this, not lazy.

For the people of falsehood today have become active.

They promote falsehood against the creed and worship agreed on by the salaf.

So we must be active in clarifying the creed of the salaf.

And explain that this creed is what the early scholars of Islam followed.

And explain, by proof, the error of those who opposed the creed of the salaf.

And from opposing the consensus of the righteous salaf.

Allah ﷻ be pleased with them.

This is one of the important matters that we should care about.

in this matter and be active in it.

As for the stance toward individuals, the scholars have detailed it.

in how to regard one who erred.

in creed or worship and then slipped therein.

And they are not all on one level.

And the stance differs.

So Sunni orthodoxy's stance toward people of whims and innovations.

or those who fell into innovations in creed and the like.

is detailed in their books, and it is quite clear.

And this truly needs a course.

And I, in truth,

I would like the brothers to hold a course on jarh and ta'dil rules.

and Sunni orthodoxy's stance toward its opponents.

For this is truly one of the most beneficial things.

Because there are principles that are mentioned.

yet some students of knowledge do not know what they mean.

and perhaps they err for not understanding them correctly.

as the scholars understood them. Also,

Some students confuse Ahl al-Sunnah's way of dealing with opponents.

and the Haddadi way of dealing with opponents.

That is because the Haddadis give no weight to scholars.

They seek to discredit them with no sound rules or principles.

They still exist and still operate. And they have their own rules.

Some students of knowledge also confuse Ahl al-Sunnah's method.

Earlier scholars established this rule and today's scholars apply it to opponents.

And explained these extremist Haddadis' method in this matter.

So if a course were held on this it would be among the most beneficial.

And perhaps Allah ﷻ will facilitate something related to this. Yes.

May Allah do good to you.

The questioner asks: What do you say about one who, when asked his madhhab

who says, "I have no madhhab; my madhhab is Islam."

Islam is not a madhhab. Islam is a religion.

Rather, the correct question is this.

Must a person adopt a madhhab?

Or may he say, "I have no madhhab except seeking the truth."

This major issue is what we will discuss, Allah willing.

about following a madhhab tomorrow Allah willing.

It is a thorny issue, but the truth in it is clear and evident.

No doubt, there is no blame on one who follows a madhhab without bias.

Likewise, there is no blame on one who does not affiliate with a madhhab.

Rather, he seeks the truth by its proof.

from the statements of recognized scholars.

And we will discuss this, Allah willing, in detail and with evidence.

in tomorrow's session, if Allah ﷻ wills. Yes.

May Allah do good to you. The questioner asks.

Some preachers often finish hadith or fiqh texts quickly.

In a week, for example, or even less.

Is this from the way of the Salaf in seeking knowledge?

And should one attend the shaykh who follows this method?

Repeat.

Some preachers often finish hadith or fiqh texts in a week or less.

Is this from the way of the Salaf in seeking knowledge?

And should one attend the shaykh who follows this method?

Scholars have different methods of teaching.

There is a method called the presentation method.

where the book is read to the shaykh and the shaykh makes brief comments.

The point of this teaching is to present the book.

by reading it to the shaykh so he can correct the text.

and he clarifies some points that were unclear in it.

This is a method used by scholars.

Our shaykh, Shaykh Ibn Baz RH would sometimes have books read to him.

Sometimes ten pages would pass by us without the shaykh commenting on them.

Then he would comment with one sentence.

on a certain page, and you find it most beneficial in its place.

This is a method among scholars called the presentation method.

Sometimes in hadith, it means presenting it with the shaykh's isnad.

where the shaykh serves as musnid for one of the hadith books.

The book is presented to the shaykh with its isnad, to transmit from him.

This is a valid method. There is no fault in it. But the flaw

is when the reading is not really reading.

It is read in a way where the words are not understood.

Nor is it clear. Rather, the letters are swallowed.

In truth, this is not beneficial. It is not beneficial or the scholars' way.

As for the presentation method, it is practiced and unobjectionable.

If the teacher is from Ahl al-Sunnah, known for goodness and truth.

Then there is no harm in a student of knowledge attending such gatherings.

The gatherings of scholars never lack goodness.

There is also another method of explanation and detail.

This too is a method with its own advantages, purpose, intent, benefit.

No doubt, the second method is more useful and more lasting in learning.

Most scholars use the first method.

That is with non-beginners.

With those who have read the science and studied it.

Then they present books to teachers.

They benefit from presentation and benefit from reading.

They benefit from this reading, unlike beginners.

A beginner needs to be taught.

The presentation method may not benefit him, but it is not harmful.

But it is not harmful.

These are established methods among scholars, with no fault in them.

If Allah wills. Yes.

The questioner says: May Allah bless you.

You mentioned a consensus reported by Shaykh Salih Aal al-Shaykh.

against criticizing Imam Abu Hanifah and his imamate.

The question is, may Allah aid you:

Did anyone before the Shaykh report the consensus?

Especially since the Shaykh lived over a thousand years after him.

So how can such a consensus be accepted?

That last part is strange.

In any case, al-Tahawi was among those who mentioned this statement.

Whoever reads the scholars' books knows the scholars' method.

They stopped transmitting this statement once its benefit ended.

Those scholars were not faulted for the benefit it served then.

When that intended benefit ended.

Whoever reads the scholars' books sees they had stopped citing it.

This is a clear inductive survey of the scholars' method.

This is the view held by most of the scholars we have known.

In our time, this is their view.

And I mentioned to you that some scholars may be driven by doctrinal zeal.

Or by a certain conflict in his land.

Or a certain view of fiqh when quoting some statements.

For example, some, when counting the imams, wrongly omit Abu Hanifa RH.

Abu Hanifa is an imam in fiqh by consensus.

He was not faulted in his fiqh.

Some only faulted him, as we said, for taking opinion and opposing hadith.

As Ibn Abi Shaybah mentioned in eighty issues, and this is as I said.

Abu Hanifa RH is not blamed for this; he had to exercise ijtihad.

He strove with what he had. As Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said.

Whoever fears Allah as much as he can.

And whoever strives to reach the ruling will be rewarded.

If he errs, he gets one reward.

If he is correct, he has his reward, for the Prophet ﷺ said.

"If a judge rules and strives, and is correct, he has his reward."

"And if he rules and strives, but errs, he has one reward."

As for the scholarly issue, that is based on the evidence.

So that is what appears.

Shaykh Salih only reported his comment on what was mentioned.

By the way, in his commentary on the Tahawi Creed, he commented on it.

This is based on induction and tracking the method of scholars.

May Allah reward and bless you, shaykh. The questioner asks.

Can we say, 'Any hadith against our imam is reinterpreted or abrogated?'

What Abu Zayd al-Dabusi RH said was an excuse for Hanafi scholars.

meaning that the reason our scholars did not act on this hadith was.

Either it was abrogated for us, or interpreted in a specific way.

This is not, in reality, rejecting the Prophet's ﷺ hadiths.

May Allah reward you.

First.

Abu Zayd al-Dabusi, not al-Dabbusi.

His name is Abu Zayd al-Dabusi.

Pronounced lightly. Second, he did not say this.

Rather, he only transmitted it. Its author was Abu al-Hasan al-Karkhi.

He was Hanafi in fiqh and Mu'tazili in creed.

He was the one who laid down this principle in his usul.

The principle is: Any verse or hadith that opposes our madhhab is interpreted.

Or it is abrogated. And it is better to interpret it.

Here you see he lays down a principle, not making an excuse.

So how can he call it a principle, then say he meant an excuse?

Then he said it is better to interpret it.

That is, it should be interpreted.

So this is an unsound principle.

It contradicts what the four imams laid down.

Including Imam Abu Hanifa RH.

And it is based on something unsound.

namely, that the imam knew all the proofs.

and is more knowledgeable than us. So if we find proof against his view.

then it should be taken as abrogated.

or that it is interpreted.

Better yet, interpret it for it is easier to prove than abrogation.

So this is a principle built on an unsound premise.

There is no doubt, as we said: there is no scholar

from the time of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ

to our own day has grasped all truth and all the proofs.

Rather, as we will see, this is a key issue in why jurists differ.

Abu Bakr al-Siddiq RA is the noblest of this Ummah.

after the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and after Jesus AS.

For Isa AS will descend at the end of time.

He will rule by the Sharia of Muhammad ﷺ.

And he is a prophet AS.

Abu Bakr al-Siddiq RA was the noblest of the Companions RA.

Yet many hadiths were unknown to him.

And there was no intermediary between him and Allah's Messenger ﷺ.

So what about the scholars who came after him?

No scholar knew all the proofs, and so they all said.

If you find authentic hadiths against our view, then leave that view.

For they knew they did not know every hadith. This is the reality.

This is Imam Malik. Imam Malik RH.

He was one of the great hadith memorizers, as we heard today.

He had not heard the hadith about interlacing the toes.

until his student Ibn Wahb related it to him.

In al-Muwatta', he mentioned hadiths unknown to him, in both Sahihs.

In the Sahihs of Bukhari and Muslim. Though later than him, they were known.

So what is in the Two Sahihs is not invented; scholars had it.

A scholar grasps some knowledge, and some knowledge escapes him.

Abu al-Hasan al-Karkhi mentioned this only as a principle.

It is not an excuse. It is an unsound way. Yes.

May Allah reward you. The questioner asks.

Why do some scholars affiliate with a madhhab?

Whoever follows the imam's principles or studies fiqh by his method.

may affiliate himself with him. And as for common people.

And one who follows an imam may affiliate himself with him.

This, Allah willing, will come later: it is agreed upon by scholars.

But there are blameworthy matters. These will be proven, Allah willing. Yes.

The questioner says: In our country, one madhhab is the standard.

Of course, if the questioner meant: Why do some scholars belong to a madhhab?

The answer is: they did not see themselves as fit for ijtihad.

Rather, they considered themselves below the rank of ijtihad.

So they affiliated themselves with the imam they deemed most learned.

And each one can say of his imam what the other said of his imam.

Some may exercise ijtihad within the madhhab and differ from it.

But he does not see himself as fit for independent ijtihad, so he affiliates.

So he ascribes himself to an imam's fiqh.

Allah willing, we will discuss whether this path is correct.

Tomorrow, Allah ﷻ willing. Yes.

May Allah bless you. The questioner asks.

In our country, the established madhhab is the Maliki madhhab.

Is it better for seekers of knowledge to study the Maliki madhhab books?

So common people will accept it?

Yes. In my view.

One reason for choosing the matn a beginner starts with in fiqh.

This is if he wants to follow the method of matns.

For learning fiqh, there are two adopted methods.

The first method is the method of fiqh matns.

That is, he chooses a fiqh matn through which he studies fiqh.

The second method is to choose a book of hadiths on legal rulings.

And study fiqh through it. Both methods are followed by scholars.

Each has its own advantages.

Perhaps, Allah willing, we will elaborate on this.

tomorrow or the day after tomorrow, Allah ﷻ willing.

So whoever wants to study fiqh through the method of matns.

then it is better to choose a text well known in his land.

Choose a text known in his land that the people there know.

He memorizes this text and studies fiqh through it.

Likewise, he reads the books of the madhhab.

Why? Because if a student of knowledge knows the matn valued there, then...

He becomes esteemed by the people, and they trust his knowledge.

Most laypeople identify with a madhhab they don't know, but know the text.

And they know its name and what the scholars there say.

So if a person knows this text and has mastered it, laypeople trust him.

Then he can convey the truth to them.

Then if he reads the madhhab books, he can, by Allah ﷻ's leave.

guide them to the Sunnah through the madhhab books.

For example, if he were Maliki.

and had studied it, then came to the issue of folding in prayer.

Through the madhhab books, he can set forth the Sunnah to the people.

And that this is what Imam Malik held.

Yes, later scholars know nothing but what is in Mukhtasar Khalil.

and attribute it to the madhhab.

But if a student of knowledge looked into the Malikis' words in their books.

such as al-Qadi Abd al-Wahhab and others.

He would find a thorough treatment of this issue in the madhhab.

Then the correct view would become clear.

From within the madhhab, the Sunnah is to fold the hands while standing.

And the hand-folding Imam Malik disliked is not the one in the Sunnah.

This is one example, and there are many others.

But the student of knowledge, while studying this way, must commit himself.

to know the evidence and the truth. As we'll explain, if Allah ﷻ wills. Yes.

May Allah bless you. The questioner says: Whoever studied Zad al-Mustaqni'

then wanted to study the Maliki madhhab, what should he study?

Of course, one thing about fiqh is that it is only learned from teachers.

One must study under a shaykh.

Reading books alone is not enough.

So if you find a shaykh well-grounded in fiqh.

He is upright and teaches a Hanbali book like Zad al-Mustaqni'.

And you want to master a Maliki matn.

Because the people in your country are Malikis.

And you want to master this matn.

So you can reach people's hearts with this knowledge.

You can still attend the lesson, write, and annotate.

Then when you return home.

Look in the matn you chose at the shared issues.

And copy the commentary onto them.

If there are issues left in the chapter the shaykh did not cover.

You can present them to the shaykh and annotate.

Thus you benefit from the Shaykh's class.

even if it is in a different text from the one you want to study.

Thus you combine two matters. Studying this text the Shaykh explains.

and studying by way of the text you chose, which suits the madhhab.

or one of the madhhab texts that is widespread in your land.

As we always say, texts are not used for worship or to draw near to Allah ﷻ.

They are only a way to master knowledge.

This is a method I advised my students to follow, and they did.

So I teach Daleel al-Talib in the Prophet's Mosque.

So some of the Maliki brothers, for example, chose a text.

that is well known in the land because texts differ.

So I always recommend the text common people know there.

They note some of my comments on issues, and present the rest to me.

And I comment on it as much as I can.

So this is a beneficial method, if Allah ﷻ wills. Yes.

May Allah reward you. The questioner asks.

What is your view of the book.

al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah, in the Maliki madhhab, by Ibn Juzayy?

Yes. Ibn Juzayy's al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah treats legal universals.

Within the madhhab, it is a useful book.

It is useful for mastering the madhhab and its universals.

I have in fact read it and found it beneficial for a jurist.

Whoever wants to be a jurist must know the differences of opinion.

Whoever does not know the differences will not reach deep mastery in fiqh.

He should know scholars' broad principles.

He should master those principles and work on weighing views.

May Allah reward you. The questioner asks.

Was Imam Malik close to the caliph, so he could order some jailed?

Imam Malik commanded great awe. As the scholars say.

Authority is the ruler's, and awe is the scholars'.

A scholar may have status and awe resembling authority and rule.

And a scholar with awe and status in people's hearts.

is counted by scholars as one with authority in open rebuke by hand.

You know scholars mention this in fiqh of forbidding evil.

Evil is not rebuked by hand except by one with authority.

Authority is either public authority, like the caliph, the judge, and the like.

Or private authority, like a father at home, or a husband at home.

And among these authorities is the authority of the scholar.

who commands reverence in people's hearts.

So if he forbids by hand, no harm results from his forbidding.

Then they count him among those with authority.

So Imam Malik RH had the awe accorded to scholars.

So he was revered. Yes.

May Allah bless you. The questioner asks: Did Imam Abu Hanifa write books?

And is al-Fiqh al-Akbar soundly attributed to him?

Books were attributed to him, some bits in usul al-fiqh, some in fiqh.

These are not soundly attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa RH.

As for al-Fiqh al-Akbar.

Abu Hanifa authored a book on tawhid called Al-Fiqh al-Akbar.

But it is not established that it is the one people have.

Especially since some transmitters of Al-Fiqh al-Akbar.

reported what is not found in the copy people have.

May Allah reward you. A questioner asks: Difference: majority vs. madhhab view?

Who are the majority, and which is stronger: their view or the madhhab's?

The term majority, used absolutely, means many of the scholars.

They are the larger group.

And if 'the overwhelming majority' is used, it means predominance.

Such that those who oppose them are few.

So if a scholar says, 'This is the view of the majority.'

It means that most scholars whose views count held this view.

while fewer scholars disagreed.

If 'the overwhelming majority' is said.

That means most scholars held this. Indeed, the great bulk did.

and only a few scholars disagreed. This is the general meaning.

As for madhhab terminology, each madhhab has its own terms.

But if it is said, 'This is the madhhab,' it means the relied-on view.

within the madhhab, as attributed to the imam of that madhhab.

May Allah reward you. He asks:

Is it permissible to follow a madhhab, like saying Maliki or Hanbali?

Would that divide the religion?

We'll explain tomorrow.

If Allah ﷻ wills. Yes.

May Allah reward you. A questioner asks.

If a student finds authentic proof that differs from the madhhab.

Should he follow the madhhab because it was vetted, verified, and refined?

Or the authentic proof?

We will speak about that tomorrow too. Allah ﷻ willing.

And explain people's levels in this. Yes.

May Allah reward you. A questioner asks.

Based on what you said yesterday, if a shaykh warned against someone

and cited evidence for warning against him.

but some shaykhs did not agree, should we warn against them?

And what is the evidence for that from books of jarh wa ta'dil or Sunnah?

This is what I referred to: the need to define jarh and ta'dil rules.

And the need to hold a course on this issue.

If a qualified scholar warns against a person.

and presents evidence for what he mentioned.

and is not met by an equal, neither in source nor in proof.

then one must follow what this scholar said, even if alone.

But if a scholar warns against a particular person.

and presents evidence as he saw it, and as sound in his view.

while others among the experts disagreed with him.

and did not think this person should be warned against.

or that this matter attributed to him makes him an innovator.

Then mere disagreement is not proof.

If the warner presents proof for it.

and the opponent offers no proof for it.

then the one who establishes the proof is the one to be followed.

But if this one presents evidence and that one presents counterproof.

then the matter is considered.

according to the scholars' rules for weighing evidence.

So whoever faces this matter must strive to weigh the proofs.

Then if it becomes clear to him that the warning is stronger.

because of its proof, not because of its source; then he follows it.

But at the same time, he excuses qualified scholars who did not warn.

so long as they gave evidence for what they said.

And he excuses whoever followed those scholars in what seemed stronger.

not by whim, nor merely because there is disagreement.

but by sound principles. And this is a major subject.

This is an issue I mention briefly.

because we find some students of knowledge cite disagreement in such matters.

If he is told that so-and-so has opposed the Sunnah.

and did such-and-such and said such-and-such.

and the qualified scholars warned against him and clarified it.

he counters this by saying that so-and-so endorses him.

A mere endorsement does not counter a detailed, evidenced statement.

But if this violation is proven by evidence.

Then consider what we mentioned yesterday.

The evidence must be authentic.

And the indication must be sound.

And the evidence must not be opposed by an equal or stronger one.

If the opposing evidence is equal, then weighing them is required.

And if the evidence opposing it is stronger than it.

whether on this side or that, the stronger evidence must be followed.

Yes.

May Allah reward the honorable Shaykh with the best reward for these benefits.

We also let the brothers know the Shaykh HA will give the khutbah.

tomorrow at Salim bin Mukhaid Mosque, in Al Mazhar, Dubai.

Peace and blessings on our Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, his family, Companions.

May Allah guide us and you to what He loves and approves.