Taqleed Prohibited: Muhadditheen were not Muqallid
► I) Muhadditheen were not Muqallid Part 2
► 1- Imaam Bayhaqi rahimahullah
► 2- Imaam Tirmidhi rahimahullah
► 3- Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee rahimahullah
► 4- Haafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahullah
► II) Taqleedi Usool
► 5- Imaam Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi rahimahullah
► 6- Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah rahimahullah
► III) Muqallid Who?
► IV) Muqallid and Arabic Passage
► V) Muqallid and Hadeeth
► VI) The Madness of Taqleed
► VII) The Messenger of Allaah also a Muqallid (Na’oodhubillah)
► VIII) Summary
This article has been translated by Brother Raza Hasa and it is originally written in Urdu by Brother Abu Khuzaimah Saleem Akhtar which you can read in the monthly Magazine of Shaikh Zubair Ali Zai “Al-Hadeeth” Vol 89.
The Salafs have already declared the muhadditheen to be Mujtahideen and they clearly stated that the muhadditheen did not do taqleed. You can read the detailed article here. https://systemoflife.com/articles/taqleed/2000002-salaf-us-saliheen-were-not-muqallideen
Part 1 of this article “Muhadditheen were not Muqallid” can be read here in this link: https://systemoflife.com/articles/taqleed/2000041-taqleed-prohibited-muhadditheen-were-not-muqallid-part-1
This is part of “Muhadditheen were not Muqallid”. A Combination of these articles is more than enough for any logical human being to believe that the muhadditheen and salafs were indeed not muqallideen.
After the commendable articles of Haafidh Zubayr Ali Za’ee and Haafidh Muhammad Siddeeq Raza on this issue, here we shall mention some additional points & references.
I) Muhadditheen were not Muqallid Part 2
1- Imaam Bayhaqi rahimahullah
According to some people, Imaam Abu Bakr Ahmed bin Husayn al-Bayhaqi rahimahullah is famous for being a Shaafi’ee “Muqallid” while the reality is contrary to this. The respected Imaam once explicitly said about himself while commenting on a hadeeth that:
“ولا أقوله تقليدا بل أقوله بالحجج التي ظهرت لي، منها…. إلخ”
“And I am not saying this doing Taqleed, rather I am saying it based on the evidences that have appeared to me, among them… and so on” [Juzz al-Juwaybaari fi Masaail Abdullah bin Salaam by al-Bayhaqi, published in Majmoo’ah Ajzaa Hadeethiyyah (2/235)]
Imaam Bayhaqi rahimahullah has himself negated from being a Muqallid – as (he implied) I take the evidences under consideration, and have no relation with taqleed. This saying of Imaam Bayhaqi also indicates that Taqleed & Dalaail (evidences) are opposites of each other. Once a Daleel arrives, Taqleed disappears; If Taqleed is there then there is no existence of Dalaail. Perhaps this is why the “Imaam” of Deobandiyah, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar wrote: “And Taqleed is only for a Jaahil” [Al-Kalaam al-Mufeed P. 234]
2- Imaam Tirmidhi rahimahullah
Imaam Tirmidhi rahimahullah is also counted among the Muqallideen of Imaam Shaafi’ee rahimahullah, while the reality is totally opposite. The “Hakeem” of Deobandi Ummah, Ashraf Ali Thaanvi said:
“قلت يدل علي أن الترمذي ليس بشافعي”
“I say: it proves that Al-Tirmidhi was not a Shaafi’ee” [Ath-Thawaab al-Huliyy Tatimmah al-Misk az-Zaki (P. 543)]
These benefits of Thaanvi are published in Urdu at the end of “Taqreer-e-Tirmidhi”. While further commenting on this saying, the student of Thaanvi, Ahmed Hasan Sanbhuli wrote:
“I say: It is evident that the erudite Muhadditheen did not do Taqleed of anyone, except that their action would resemble some A’immah in some issues, whom they are attributed to or (said to) do Taqleed of. The gist is that whenever they find the saying of a Muqallad (the one whose Taqleed is done) going against the Hadeeth, then they oppose those A’immah; and this is the way of the people of Tahqeeq of this Ummah”
[Taqreer-e-Tirmidhi (P. 56), with Tahqeeq Takhreej Haashiah of Mufti Abdul Qaadir, “Shaykh ul-Hadeeth” of Daarul Uloom Kabeer Walah; Proof-Reading & Introduction by Mufti Taqi Uthmaani]
The “Aalim Rabbaani” of Deobandi Sect, Abdul Qaadir explains the saying of Thaanvi under its footnote saying:
“Imaam Tirmidhi has objected on the saying of Imaam Shaafi’ee on the issue of delaying Zuhr until it cools off; this proves that he was not Shaafi’ee ul-Maslak” [Ibid]
Benefit: Not only this reference proves that Imaam Tirmidhi was not a Muqallid, it also proves that according to the Akaabir Deobandis, a Muqallid is one who does not object to his Imaam’s saying; otherwise he will not remain a Muqallid. Some more light will be shed on this later ahead. In-shaa-Allaah
3- Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee rahimahullah:
While mentioning the Maslak of Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee, “Shaykh ul-Hadeeth” (of Jaami’ah Rasooliyah Sheeraaziyah Bilaal Ganj Lahore) Haaji Muhammad Ali Sahab writes:
“In the understanding of Qur’aan & Hadeeth, all his concentration & reflexion was towards the literality of words; and his nature was mild towards authentic transmission instead of the derived conclusion reached by reasoning; meaning, instead of deriving different meanings, he was mild more towards adhering by the words. By Madhab, although he was known as a Hanbali, but due to the above mentioned reason, he did not adopt any Maslak or Madhab with its entire details among the various different Fiqhi Madhaahib and famous I’tiqaadi Masaalik. That is why, despite being a Hanbali, the A’immah of Hanbali group do not agree with some of his opinions.” [Muqaddimah al-Wafa Bi-Ahwaal al-Mustafa – Translation: “Allaamah” Ashraf Siyaalwi Barelwi (P. 7-8), Fareed Bookstore Lahore]
From this statement of the Braylwee “Shaykh ul-Hadeeth”, it becomes clear that Imaam Ibn al-Jawzee rahimahullah was not a Muqallid as well.
4- Haafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahullah:
Haafidh Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani rahimahullah says:
“…Because All of Us Ahlul hadeeth consider that person a liar who claims to be a Sahabi after Abul Tufayl Aamir Bin Wathla (ra) and Allaah is the one that guides to the truth…”[Al-Majma’ Al-Muassis Lil-Mu’jam Al Mufahris Pg 552]
While addressing in a gathering of “Khatm-e-Bukhaari Shareef” at Jaami’ah Khayr ul-Madaaris Multan, the “Wakeel of Ahnaaf” Master Ameen Okaarvi said:
“The teacher of Imaam Bukhaari Hadhrat Yahya bin Ma’een, who wrote one million narrations, also used to do the Taqleed of Imaam Abu Haneefah rehmatullah alayh. And today, the people want to free themselves from Taqleed by just reading one page of ‘Buloogh al-Maraam’ which is a book, written by a Ghayr Muqallid” [Monthly al-Khayr (V. 14 Shumarah 9, Ramadan 1417 H, February 1997 CE, P. 48)]
Every student of hadeeth knows that Buloogh al-Maraam is the book of Haafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani rahimahullah, who is declared a “Ghayr Muqallid” by a person possessing self-proclaimed attributes like “Wakeel-e-Ahnaaf, Munaazir-e-Islaam, and Tarjumaan-e-Ahle Sunnat”
Benefit: Usually everyone speaks the language of Master Ameen Okaarvi demanding that Ahl al-Hadeeth should prove the existence of any of their book, risalah, pamphlet, or translation of hadeeth before the reign of British; so this statement of Master Ameen Okaarvi himself contains the answer that the author of the book Buloogh al-Maraam, written before the reign of British, was an “Ahl al-Hadeeth” or as according to the Ilm-e-Kalaam of Deobandis a “Ghayr Muqallid”.
II) Taqleedi Usool:
The Deobandi “Aalim Rabbaani” Abdul Qaadir mentioned above with reference to Imaam Tirmidhi that: “Imaam Tirmidhi objected on the saying of Imaam Shaafi’ee which proves that he was not Shaafi’ee ul-Maslak.” This Usool proves that “Whoever objects on the Imaam’s saying, he no longer remains a Muqallid.” Now according to this Usool, all those A’immah and Muhadditheen who are attributed to any of the Imaams, they must not have opposed their Imaam in any place or otherwise they would not remain Muqallid.
Now let’s observe some examples:
5- Imaam Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi rahimahullah:
He is attributed to the Maaliki Madhab. However, after mentioning the saying of Imaam Maalik on the issue of Hadd on a Fornicator Bondwoman, he said while refuting Imaam Maalik:
“لكن حديث النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم أولي أن يتبع”
“However, the hadeeth of the Prophet is more befitting to be followed” [Fath al-Baari (12/199, under H. 6837-6838)]
By rejecting the saying of Imaam Maalik rahimahullah, Imaam Ibn al-Arabi rahimahullah proved that he is not a Maaliki Muqallid.
6- Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah rahimahullah:
Imaam Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ishaaq bin Khuzaymah rahimahullah is counted among the Shawaafi’, whereas, he says concerning the Rafa al-Yadain of third rak’ah that:
“هو سنة، وإن لم يذكره الشافعي فإلاسناد صحيح”
“It is Sunnah, although Ash-Shaafi’ee did not mention it, thus the chain is Saheeh” [Fath al-Baari (2/283 under # 739)]
Shaykh Ibn Baaz rahimahullah said about this saying of Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah rahimahullah that: “Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah has spoken well on this issue, and he deserves it rahimahullah” [Ta’leeq Fath ul-Baari: same]
This also proves that Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah rahimahullah was not Shaafi’ee ul-Maslak as well.
Besides this, if you look at other A’immah rahimahumullah, then according to this “Usool” all of them will prove to be “Ghayr Muqallid” despite being attributed to someone. In fact, the Ahnaaf themselves would often be seen in the row of “Ghayr Muqallidiyyat” leaving Imaam Abu Haneefah in many issues.
The present Muqallideen continuously try day & night making an unsuccessful attempt, to show A’immah and Muhadditheen rahimahumullah as a Muqallid like them; while the reality is opposite to this – as passed.
Were the A’immah Karaam rahimahumullah Muqallid like them? Let’s understand this in another style:
Explanation in another way:
Master Ameen Okaarvi has repeatedly said with different wordings in “Tajalliyaat wa Majmoo’ah Rasaa’il” that there were only two types of people in Khayr ul-Quroon: Mujtahid and Muqallid. There was no other type. Now the “Imaam” of these people, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar writes:
“And Taqleed is only for a Jaahil” [Al-Kalaam al-Mufeed (P. 234)]
So the saying of Master Ameen in other words means that, there were only two types of people: Mujtahid and Jaahil.
This comes to mean that Muhadditheen Karaam were Muqallid and in other words “Jaahil”. Is this not an insult of A’immah of Deen??
III) Muqallid Who?
Further understand it like this: According to the “Muqallideen”, in order to remain within the circle of Taqleed, it is necessary to step away from “Dalaail”; otherwise, he will not remain a Muqallid. In fact,
if someone demands a Daleel (proof) for some issue, then simply for demanding the Daleel, it is necessary for a person to do a course of seventeen (17) years as written by a Deobandi “Mufti A’dham Faqeeh ul-Asr” Rasheed Ahmed Ludhiyaanwi. He writes:
“The Awaam can inquire the laws of Sharee’ah from the Muftiyaan-e-Karaam, but not the permission of demanding Dalaail. Yes, however, if someone is keen for Ilm-e-Dalaail then he must first successfully complete a general course of fifteen (15) years with high grades from a reliable religious school, then he must seek admission for the level of Takhassus (specialty) of Iftaa for two years and achieve a distinguished success by working hard; then he must work for some time under the supervision of experts of the field. After this, it is possible that he might develop the ability to understand the Dalaail. Wallaahu Ta’ala A’lam” [Ahsan ul Fataawa (1/402)]
Meaning:(1) First he must complete a general course of 15 years and that even with high grades.
(2) Then a two year Iftaa-e-Takhassus and that also with distinguishing success.
(3) Then after that course of 17 years, he must also spend (some unknown period of) time with the experts of the field.
And this entire struggle is done merely for being able to “demand Daleel” and the result will still be that: “There is hope that he will develop the ability to understand dalaail”. Now imagine! Do these Muqallideen and this Circle of Taqleed have anything to do with A’immah Muhadditheen?
IV) Muqallid and Arabic Passage:
In the circle of Taqleed, a “Muqallid” even has to stay away from the Arabic text of a hadeeth. The teacher of Jaami’ah ar-Rasheed, “Mufti” Abu Lubaabah Shaah Mansoor [see, Qaaflah Haqq Vol. 3 Sh. 3 P. 43, Rajab to Ramadan 1430 H] writes while discussing the attributes of Imaam Mahdi rahimahullah:
“Dear Readers! There are two indications found in hadeeth that…. Both these Ahaadeeth are in front of me in Arabic with reference; the reference is that of Muslim Shareef and Mishkaat Shareef. However, if we went towards the Arabic text then this article would become a Tahqeeqi article, while this poor man (i.e. talking about himself) is not capable of Tahqeeq.” [Dajjaal Kon Kab Kahan (Page 25 & in another printing it is page 31)]
Meaning, according to the Teacher of Jaami’ah ar-Rasheed “Mufti” (and a Muqallid of his Deobandi Akaabir), going towards the Arabic text of a hadeeth is equivalent to abandoning Taqleed, and Tahqeeq is contrary to it. He further writes:
“We turn towards our Akaabir for Tahqeeq… It is our fortune that we go by looking towards them and asking from them, and believe that caution and success is in their Taqleed”[Same (page 25-26)]
Dear Readers! Notice that in the circle of Taqleed, merely going towards the Arabic text of hadeeth is Tahqeeq i.e. Adm-e-Taqleed.
Now the A’immah Muhadditheen, whose days & nights, were spent not only in compilation and writing down of hadeeth, but extracting rulings from hadeeth was also their specialty and practice. So how can they be Muqallid or how can they be called Muqallid?
V) Muqallid and Hadeeth:
The Muhaqqiq entitled “Ittihaad-e-Ahle Sunnat”, the student and nephew of Master Ameen Okaarvi, Mahmood Aalam Safdar, went several times ahead of all of the above mentioned people and said:
“Similarly, that which is said nowadays that all the narrations of Bukhaari and Muslim are obligatory to follow, then Muhaddith Kawthari has said that this is not correct because it is not obligatory on a Mujtahid to do Taqleed of someone else, while it is obligatory for a Muqallid to do the taqleed of his Mujtahid. Thus acting upon the narrations of Bukhaari and Muslim does not remain Waajib neither on the Mujtahid nor on the Muqallid (Al-Ta’leeqaat P. 77).”[Qatraat Al-Atr Sharh Urdu Nukhbat al-Fikr P. 93]
Here we go! “Muhaqqiq-e-Ittihaad Ahle Sunnat” and his “Muhaddith” Kawthari have forbidden the Mujtahid as well along with the Muqallid to follow the narrations narrated by someone else as, if he acts on the narrations of someone else and accepts them, then in reality he will become his Muqallid, while the taqleed of others is not obligatory on him.
Dear Readers! Now if some Muqallid narrates a hadeeth to you from some book then tell him that he is doing the “taqleed” of the narrator of this hadeeth and is abandoning the taqleed of his “Imaam”. Therefore, it is obligatory upon him to narrate only the narrations narrated by his Imaam.
While discussing the conditions of a Saheeh hadeeth, Mahmood Alam Safdar further said:
“And even after the fulfillment of these conditions, a Mujtahid will choose it to act upon, not a Muqallid; a Muqallid is only obliged to do Taqleed” [Qatraat P. 102]
These quotes do not require any explanation that a Muqallid has no relation with Hadeeth, because he is “only obliged to do Taqleed.”
Notice, how can the A’immah Muhadditheen rahimahumullah be called “Muqallid” in this condition?
VI) The Madness of Taqleed:
It is evident from the above mentioned Deobandi & Non-Deobandi references that Muhadditheen have no relation with Taqleed, as the kind of relation they have. But when the madness of Taqleed surrounds one’s heart and brain then it does not care for anything, and it tries to include everyone in this circle. In fact the Imaam, whose Taqleed is boasted about in the world and whose Taqleed is believed to be the success of both worlds, is also declared a “Muqallid”. Deobandi “Shaykh ul-Islaam, Mufti” Muhammad Taqi Uthmaani, while describing different levels of Taqleed, he writes under the heading: “Fourth Level, the Taqleed of Mujtahid Mutlaq”:
“The last level of Taqleed is the Taqleed of “Mujtahid Mutlaq”… like Imaam Abu Haneefah, Imaam Shaafi’ee, Imaam Maalik, and Imaam Ahmed etc. Although these people are Mujtahids in both Usool and Furoo, but even they have to do a certain type of Taqleed. And that is in a way that the issues in which there is no clear affirmation found in Qur’aan and Authentic Sunnah, there these people often try to seek a saying or action of Sahaabah or Taabi’een instead of making a decision solely from their opinion and Qiyaas; thus if they find any such saying or action then these people also do its Taqleed.”[Taqleed ki Shara’ee Haysiyat: P. 109-110, Dars-e-Tirmidhi: 1/124]
See, the A’immah on whose “Taqleed” these people distribute the “good news” of Paradise, also could not be protected from “Taqleed”,
and they also became “Muqallid”. In short, “Mujtahid Mutlaq” whose Taqleed is done are Muqallid and the Awaam is also “Muqallid”!!
It should be kept in mind that Master Ameen Okaarvi has written:
“Yes, those A’immah have stated: The one who has the ability to do Ijtihaad on his own, it is obligatory on him to do Ijtihaad, while Taqleed is Haraam on him” [Tajalliyaat Safdar: Vol. 3 P. 407]
VII) The Messenger of Allaah also a Muqallid (Na’oodhubillah):
Dear Readers! These people did not just stop here, but this Taqleedi madness surrounded someone’s mind such that he went too far ahead jumping until he started claiming the Prophet Sayyidunah Muhammad the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) to be included in the “Circle of Taqleed”.
A Deobandi “Munaazir-e-Islaam, Wakeel-e-Ahnaaf, Doctor” Manzoor Ahmed Mayngal, Teacher of Hadeeth at Jaami’ah Farooqiyah Karachi, wrote:
“If there is a difference in Taqleed & Ittibaa then how would you reply to these passages? Sahaabah were definitely Muqallid, but if we go a step ahead and say that the Noble Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was also a Muqallid, then this is also adjustable”[Tuhfat ul-Munaazir (P. 110-111)]
We come to know that Awaam, Scholars, Fuqaha, Muhadditheen, Mujtahideen rahimahumullah; Sahaabah, and the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) no one can escape from Taqleed. In fact they themselves beat around the bush in this issue; they say one thing at one time and something else at another!!
In the same breathe they say:
“And Taqleed is only for a Jaahil” [Al-Kalaam al-Mufeed (P. 234)]
Inna lillaahi wa inna ilayhi rajioon.
VIII) Summary: In this article we clarified that:
1- Muhadditheen Karaam rahimahumullah were not “Muqallid”
2- According to the Muqallideen, a Muqallid has nothing to do with Hadeeth and Tahqeeq.
3- A Muqallid is the Muqallid of a Muqallid. Meaning, the A’immah whose Taqleed is done, were also Muqallid. So they remain a Muqallid of a Muqallid.
4- The one who objects on the saying of Imaam does not remain a Muqallid
May Allaah guide us all to the straight path, Ameen. The Muhadditheen were not Muqallid Allaah knows best.