| by Sh. Abdullah Hasan What is the meaning of the statement by the four Imams: Abu   Hanifah, Malik, al-Shafi'i, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, that 'when a hadith is   found to be authentic that is my adopted position (in fiqh)'? Summary: ·          Statements   such as these by the illustrious Fuqaha are to be understood in their   proper context. They were addressing them to their students and scholars   alike and not to any lay people and non-specialists in fiqh and hadith. ·          The   statements could also be interpreted to mean that an individual scholar will   be given license to investigate Ahadith (if he is capable) but must   not contradict theUsul or the principles of the imām (madhab) in its   entirety. ·          Language   should not be (always) taken literally. Speech should be understood in their   correct context by considering the addresser and the addressee of a   particular statement(s). ·          Single   or a group of Ahadith are not sufficient for deducing Ahkam  (rulings) from the sources. ·          Those   who are competent and fulfil the criterion of ijtihad are only   suitable to directly investigate and deduce rulings from the Qur'an  and Sunnah. ·          Those   who are novices in the Arabic language and fiqh (jurisprudence) are   required to conform to the views and investigations of qualified scholarship. ·          Each   of the great mujtahidun scholars opined certain methodology when   investigating Ahadith and fiqh. If a competent scholar ignores   to apply a particular authentic hadith it does not necessarily imply   that he is neglecting the narration intentionally nor does it necessarily   mean that he was unaware of the narration. Understanding language One of the most important branches of Usul   al Fiqh, Tafseer and other sciences is the study of language.   Linguistics includes principles relating to the way in which words convey   their meanings, and to the clarity and ambiguity of words and their   interpretation. The knowledge of these principles is essential to the proper   understanding of the sources of the Shari'ah, the Qur'an and the authentic   Ahadith of the Prophet, which laws and rulings are deduced. Language[1] is employed by people to   communicate with each other; teach, express emotions and feelings. Without   the correct understanding of language there would be much difficulty in the way   in which people and civilisation develops. However, although there are universal modes   of language, the way in which we express our thoughts and communicate our   speech will vary from country to country, culture to culture and person to   person. An educated man, for example, will differ in expression and the   method of articulation of his thoughts from the way a man who has a simple   elementary education; a doctor's level of communication will differ from that   of a farmer; a lawyers method of expression and choice of phrases and words   will differ with a student; a university professor's writing and usage of   prose and rhymes therein will differ from a beginner learning a language, so   on and so forth. Furthermore our language or the words and   phrases we employ in our day to day conduct and communication with other   people will differ immensely when we consider our environment, context or to   whom we address our message etc. Our cognitive and emotional state of mind   will also effect and influence, to a large extent, the way in which we   communicate and express our feelings and inner understanding. An intelligent   person will survey the listener and articulate his or her thoughts   appropriately. Conversely and, depending on the level of the understanding of   the audience, each person or group will determine or interpret the conveyed   message in varied forms and elucidations. Speech and its objectives Ibn 'Ashur explains this very succinctly in   his treatise on Maqasid al-Shari'ah under the chapter heading   'Insufficiency of the literal methodology without knowledge of the Higher   Objectives': ''Never has speech in any human language,   nor of its genres and styles in a particular language, been sufficient by   itself to indicate the intent (Maqsad) of the speaker in such a   way that would preclude any possibility of doubt about the signification (dalalah)   of his words. I mean the kind of signification referred to as explicit   expression (nass) that is unequivocal in denoting one particular meaning to   the exclusion of others. However, the meaning of words in different   languages, and the meanings of different types of speech in the same   language, vary greatly in the degree of doubt and probability (ihtimal)   arising in the mind about the purport (murad) of that speech. Some   types of speech are more open to interpretation than others, just as speech   authors differ in their capacity to articulate in an unequivocal way the   meanings they intend by the words they use. Hence, some speakers are   described as fluent or eloquent.''[2] He also highlights that the understanding of   the listeners or the audience of a particular speech will vary depending on   their capacity to understand the various contours of language, ''Similarly, in so far as their   understanding of its import is concerned, the share of listeners to a speech   also varies according to their understanding and practice of the idioms of   that speech and the styles of those who belong to the same category as the   author of that speech. Likewise, neither speakers nor listeners can afford to   ignore certain features that surround a speech act, namely the context, the   capacity (maqam) from which that act flows as well as its background   information. All these elements consolidate one another in such a way as   would exclude some possibilities of interpretation that might concur to the   listener's mind concerning the speaker's intention. This is the reason why   the speaker's direct words to his listeners express his intention more   clearly than when they are conveyed by another person. Likewise, a speech   conveyed to others in writing is more open to different interpretations that   a speech conveyed verbatim, let alone speech that is addressed directly. This   is because a written speech loses the connotations of context and the   features of both the speaker and the conveyer, despite the fact that it is   more accurate for it is less subject to distortion, omission, or having its   meaning expressed in different words when the conveyer fails to retain the   original words of the speaker.''[3] Additionally he clarifies the mistake of   those who only take the literal words in a speech without considering the   context and import of the conveyer and the variant capacity of the listeners. It is in this light that the reported   statements 'when a hadith is found to be authentic then that is my adopted   position' (and similar statements) by the illustrious Imams of the four   acceptable and popular schools of thought have been and should be understood   and interpreted. Ibn 'Ashur in his treatise on Maqasid further   explained: ''It is here also that we can realise the   inaccuracy and unsoundness of the statement attributed to al-Shafi'i, in   which he is reported to have said: ''If a tradition (khabar) from God's   Apostle is proven authentic, then that is my adopted position,'' for such as   statement cannot be uttered by a scholar who has attained the level of a   mujtahid. Moreover, evidence from al-Shafi'i's juristic doctrines compels us   to believe that this statement is either wrongly attributed to him or has   been distorted, unless he means by authenticity the perfect signification   based on the considerations that we have explained, and provided it is free   from opposition from what we have warned against.''[4] Ibn 'Ashur then clarifies how this statement   from al-Shafi'i (and others) should be understood, ''Accordingly al-Shafi'i's statement can be   interpreted as follows: When you examine my juristic views, you should know   that they are based on authentic tradition.''[5] The issue and the confusion Unfortunately in recent times these   statements by these great scholars of Islamic law have been taken out of   context and sometimes used to substantiate an adopted methodology in fiqh by   certain individuals and groups. Many books have been authored on denouncing   the concept of taqlid (conformation) by all, even the non-specialists   who may not have the basic understanding of the Arabic language or even   unable appreciate the vast intellectual differences in the areas of Usul   al-Fiqh, Usul al-Hadith, Usul al-Tafseer and other such disciplines   in Islamic law. Countless articles, YouTube videos,   discussions on forums and even lectures have been produced to propagate the   notion of completely rejecting the views of these scholars when an   'authentic' narration, according to them, is found which stands incongruity   to the perceived authentic narration they have. Much confusion and sedition (fitnah)   arose from these inaccurate interpretations of these scholars to the extent   that lay people or non-specialists in the sciences of the Arabic language and   Islamic law have been going around shouting and screaming to shun conforming   to the views of the four established schools of thought and take from where   they took, i.e., directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah (prophetic traditions),   without understanding or possessing the qualifications of the precepts and   principle of language and methodology of deduction. Henceforth I shall endeavour to further   explain the correct and sound purport of these scholars when they uttered   such statements and how we the audience and listeners should understand and   analyse them. Following are some of the reports by the   heads of these schools of thought and their brief analysis: Abu Hanifah: 1.      “When   a hadith is found to be sahih (authentic), then that is my adopted   position.”[6] 2.      ''It   is not permitted for anyone to accept our views if they do not know from   where we got them from.''[7] 3.      ''It   is not permissible for someone to give legal verdicts from my books that he   should do so without knowing from where I took from.''[8] 4.      ''It   is prohibited for someone who does not know my evidence to give verdicts on   the basis of my words.''[9] 5.      ''For   indeed we are human: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next   day.''[10] 6.      ''Woe   to you, O Ya'qub! Do not write down everything you hear from me, for it   happens that I hold one opinion today and reject it tomorrow, or hold one   opinion tomorrow and reject it the day after tomorrow.''[11] 7.      ''When   I say something contradicting the Book of Allāh the Exalted or what is   narrated from the Messenger  8.      ''What   has come from the Prophet  Malik Ibn Anas: 1.      Indeed   I am only a human: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes).   Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the   Sunnah accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah,   ignore it.''[14] 2.      ''Everyone   after the Prophet  3.      ''The   Messenger of Allāh  Muḥammad Ibn Idris   al-Shafi'i: 1.      ''In   every issue where the people of narration find a report from the Messenger   ofAllāh  2.      ''Every   hadith on the authority of the Prophet  3.      ''For   everything I say, if there is something authentic from the Prophet  4.      ''The   sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh  5.      ''The   Muslims are unanimously agreed that if a sunnah of the Messenger of Allāh  6.      ''If   you find in my book (writings) something different to the Sunnah of the   Messenger of Allāh  7.      ''When   a hadith is found to be sahih (authentic), then that is my adopted   position.''[23] Ahmad ibn Hanbal: 1.      ''   Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Malik, nor Shafi'i,   nor Awza'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took.''[24] 2.      ''The   opinion of Awza'i, the opinion of Malik, the opinion of Abu Hanifah: all of   it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the athar(narrations).''[25] 3.      ''Whoever   rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allāh  4.      ''From   the lack of understanding of a man is to follow his religion from men.''[27] Brief discussion: ·          Every   scholar is bound to follow this precept of following the authentic narration   over anything else. However, not all authentic hadith is to be implemented   and actioned. Some could be abrogated; others could be specified or   qualified. Furthermore there are varied opinions among the scholars in a   given hadith as regards to the authenticity of it. Not all authentic Ahadith  are in the same level of authenticity. There are countless number of Ahadith  upon which the hadith specialists and Fuqaha have differed upon its   authenticity and grade of authenticity. Therefore whose gradation does one   follow? One who is not qualified to sieve through the corpus of hadith  collections must conform to the experts and specialists in that field. To   perform ijtihad is a challenging task. Scholars cite some conditions: - Knowing the Arabic Language which   includes: Nahu [grammar] sarf [Arabic morphology],Balagha  [science of rhetoric] and the knowledge of al-huruf ['Ilm al Huruf] - Knowledge of the Qur'an which includes:   Ahkam al-Qur'an, the knowledge of the nuzul of the Qur'an, the science of   Nasikh and Mansukh, the science of the Qira'at, and the science of tafsir. - Knowledge of the Sunnah which includes:   Mustalah hadith [also jarh wa ta'dil and the ilal of hadith], the legal   ordinances contained in the Sunnah, the causes or instances of the ahadith   [asbab wurud al hadith] etc. - Usul al Fiqh which includes: Knowing the   general and the specific texts, the mutlaq and the muqayyad, the abrogating   and the abrogated, and the qawi'd al fiqhiyiat and their application, and the   Maqasid ash Shari'ah. - Knowledge of those matters that have   consensus [ijma' as sahih].[28] ·          The   canons of hadith collections were not available during their era.   Scholars were still collecting Ahadith from various locations and hadith  masters, it was not till later that the books of hadith we have today   were codified and written. The narrations were not available to the masses   but mostly restricted to students and scholars. It is quite impossible to infer   from the Imams that they were referring to non-specialists. Even if they were   the statements of the Imams such as 'when a hadith is found to be   authentic then that is my adopted position' are referring to competent   scholars to make that judgement. ·          Statements   such as 'take from where they took' suggest that the Imams are making   it clear that one should investigate the root sources, i.e., the Qur'an and   Sunnah directly and evaluate the verses and narrations. This surely is   suggesting that the one who should do so should be well versed in the   sciences of the Arabic language and possesses the tools of ijtihad and   istinbat, does it not? The Imams are not referring to a novice in the   Arabic language nor are they referring to ill-equipped and unqualified individuals. ·          Reading   the writings and the Usul of imām Malik, for example, makes it clear   that he did not mean what some suggest in our times; he followed certain Usul   or principles in fiqh and accepting Ahadith. For example, he would give   preference to the 'amal ahlal Madīnah when a narration contradicts the   widespread action of the people ofMadīnah. ·          Statements   such as 'do not follow my opinion but follow the narrations' or 'whoever   is rejecting a narration is on the brink of destruction' if taken   literally from the Imams seems contradictory since they themselves   disregarded certain Ahadith in their writings because they believed   certain particular Ahadith have been abrogated or specified or even   there are other more authentic Ahadith to a particular narration. This has been   clarified by many scholars. For example, imām al-Razi explains why it is not   possible to extract rulings from a single hadith or a group of Ahadith  without looking at the verses and Ahadith in their entirety and   comprehensively. This can be done only by a specialist in that field.  The following is a summary of the reasons: 1. There is a possibility that the ruling   that one conclude from the single evidence has been restricted to certain   circumstances, without one's knowledge. 2. There is a possibility that the   expression of the single evidence is metaphoric. 3. Our reference in language is linguists,   which are people who could err. 4. Arabic grammar is conveyed to us via   ancient Arabic poetry, which was narrated through individuals' narrations   (riwayat ahad). These narrations are not certain and the original poets   themselves could have made grammatical mistakes. 5. There is a possibility that one or more   of the words of this single evidence have multiple meanings. 6. There is a possibility that one or more   of the words of the single evidence have been altered, over time, in a way   that alters the original meaning. 7. There is a possibility that the   expression has a hidden (khafī) meaning that we do not understand. 8. There is a possibility that the ruling   that we conclude from the single evidence has been abrogated, without   evidence our knowledge. 9. There is a possibility that a ruling that   we conclude from single evidence is at odds with 'reason.' In such case   (al-Razi says), if both reason and narration are confirmed, then one of them   is wrong. Moreover, reason is our means to confirm the validity of narration   itself. Therefore, reason has precedence over narrations. Thus, we should   follow reason, and not the linguistic evidence of the narration.[29] ·          Each   of these mujtahidun were addressing competent students, who themselves   were qualified to deduce rulings directly from the Qur'an and Sunnah;   students like Abu Yusuf, al-Shaybani were qualified to make judgements on the   sources. Many scholars past   and present have explained the correct way to understand these statements.   For example, Taqi al-Din al-Subki's Ma'na Qawl al-Imamal-Muttalibi Idha   Sahha al-Hadithu Fahuwa Madhhabi; Ibn al-ṣalāh's Adab al-Mufti waal-Mustafti;   and the first volume of al-Nawawi's al-Majmu', all have understood these   famous statements in the manner that have been clarified above. Please refer   to these writings in particular for a more detailed discussion. The correct way to understand these   statements may be summarised as follows: 1. Is that the Imams restricted the   instructions to qualified individuals in the various sciences who are capable   of sifting the abrogating and sound Ahadith from the abrogated and   unsound ones as well as extract the rulings from their collective evidence   according to the principles of the Law and those of the Arabic language. Al-Nawawi explained:   ''What imām al-Shafi'i said does not mean that everyone who sees a sahih   hadith should say “This is the madhhab of al-Shafi'i,” applying the purely   external or apparent meaning of his statement. What he said most certainly   applies only to such a person as has the rank of ijtihad in the madhhab. It   is a condition for such a person that he be firmly convinced that either imām   al-Shafi'i was unaware of this hadith or he was unaware of its authenticity.   And this is possible only after having researched all the books of al-Shafi'i   and similar other books of the companions of al-Shafi'i, those who took   knowledge from him and others similar to them. This is indeed a difficult   condition to fulfil. Few are those who measure up to this standard in our   times. What we have explained has been made conditional because imām   al-Shafi'i had abandoned acting purely on the external meaning of many   hadiths, which he declared and knew. However, he established proofs for   criticism of the hadith or its abrogation or specific circumstances or   interpretation and so forth. Shaykh Abu 'Amr [Ibn al-ṣalāh] said: “It is no   trivial matter to act according to the apparent meaning of what imām   al-Shafi'i said. For it is not permissible for every faqih – let alone a   layman ('ammi) – to act independently with what he takes to be a proof from   the hadith… Therefore, whoever among the Shafi'i's finds a hadith that   contradicts his School must examine whether he is absolutely accomplished in   all the disciplines of ijtihad, or in that particular topic, or specific   question. [If he is,] then he has the right to apply it independently. If he   is not, but finds that contravening the hadith bears too heavily upon   him–after having researched it and found no justification for contravening   it–then he may apply it if another independent imām other than al-Shafi'i   applies it. This is a good excuse for him to leave the madhab of his imām in   such a case.”[30] Ibn Abidin wrote: ''It is not hidden that   this is for one qualified to examine the texts and has knowledge of its   non-abrogated from its abrogated, so when the scholars of the madhhab   deliberate on an evidence and act upon it, its attribution to the madhhab is sound   due to it issuing by permission from the founder of the madhhab, since there   is no doubt that if he knew the weakness of his proof, he would go back on it   and follow the stronger proof.''[31] 2. That the scholar should not contradict   the Usul of the madhab in its entirety. As mentioned before each   scholar is certain Usul in accepting or applying hadith etc. If a   scholar wishes to implement a hadith then he should not go against the   madhab in its entirety. Ibn Abidin stated: ''That must be   conditional within the madhab whether the view agrees to a view in the   madhab. Since he is not given permission to perform ijtihad in so far as that   goes against the school in its entirety in which the Imams (of the school)   have agreed upon, because their reasoning (ijtihad) is stronger than his.   Therefore the clear thing is that they saw evidence more strong than what he   understood and did not act upon it.''[32] An example: Abu al-Walid Ibn Abi al-Jarud, a scholar of   the Shafi'i school pronounced that al-Shafi'i's position in the issue of   cupping while fasting is that one's fast is nullified as per the rigorously   authenticated hadith of the Prophet  ''The one administering the cupping and the   one being cupped have both broken their fasts.''[33] However, the view of al-Shafi'i and other   scholars including Abu Hanifah, Malik, al-Thawri, and Companions, like Abu   Sa`id al-Khudri, Ibn Mas`ud, `A'ishah, and Umm Salamah, and Successors like   `Urwah and Sa`id b. Jubayr, was that cupping does not invalidate the fasting   nor the one who is administering it. How did al-Shafi'i and others understand or   interpret the above authentic narration? A number of explanations have been forwarded   by these scholars. One plausible justification they gave is that of   abrogation. They argued that that the above hadith has been abrogated   by other authentic narrations, for example, “The Prophet  Here is a clear example of how scholars   interpreted certain authentic narrations. If a person were to exclaim the   slogan of 'follow sahih hadith only' and ignore the view of al-Shafi'i   and others on this particular issue without knowing and understanding the   scholastic heritage and Usul al-Hadith interpretations, how silly   would he sound! 1. If indeed the Imams were ignorant of a   particular hadith around a given issue the scholars of the school or   competent masters of hadith and fiqh later came and adjusted   the position of the madhab. This arduous task has been carried out by   scholars over the centuries, and of course this can only be done by qualified   and competent scholars. An example: In the Hanafi school the Sunnah of   bathing (ghusl) before going to Friday prayer (Jumu'ah). The position of the   school is that the validity of this Sunnah bath is nullified if one's   ablution (wudhu) is broken between the bath and the Friday prayer, in which   case one needs to bathe again to attain the reward of the Sunnah. Yet we find in the   Radd al-muhtar of Ibn 'Abidin, the foremost fatwa resource for the late   Hanafi school, that imām 'Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi, after mentioning the above   ruling, notes that there are two positions about it among scholars of the   madhhab: The first is the position of those who hold the legal reason for   this bath is purification (Taharah), in which case nullifying one's ablution   between it and the prayer would invalidate it. The second is the position of   those who hold that the reason for the bath is cleanliness (nadhafa), in   which case nullifying ablution and repeating it between the bath and the   prayer would not invalidate it, for the extra ablution, if anything,   increases cleanliness. Nabulusi adopts this second position because in his   words “the hadiths on this matter imply that the aim is attaining cleanliness   alone”,[35] and Ibn 'Abidin inclines towards it also, because of theAhadith  about the merit of coming to the mosque from the first hour on Friday morning   to wait for the congregational prayer (Jumu'ah). Abu Hurayra relates that the   Prophet  ''Whoever bathes on   Friday as he would for major ritual impurity (janaba), then goes early [to   the mosque] is as though he has sacrificed a she-camel. Whoever goes in the   second hour [of daylight] is as though he has sacrificed a cow. Whoever goes   in the third hour is as though he has sacrificed a ram. Whoever goes in the   fourth hour is as though he has sacrificed a chicken. Whoever goes in the   fifth hour is as though he has offered an egg. And when the imām comes out   [to begin the sermon], the angels [stop recording, and] come to listen to the   remembrance.''[36] Ibn 'Abidin says of Nabulusi's position   (that the bath (ghusl) on Friday is not invalidated by having to renew one's ablution   before the Friday prayer): ''It is attested to   by the demand to go early to the prayer, best done in the first hour of the   day, which extends till sunrise. When doing this, it might prove difficult to   keep one's ablution (wudhu) until the time for the prayer arrives, especially   on the longest days of the year. Repeating the bath would be even more   arduous, while [Allāh says in Surah al-Hajj:] “He has not placed any hardship   upon you in religion” (Qur'an 22:78). It might also lead to holding back from   going to the bathroom while praying, which is unlawful.''[37] Here we see an early position of the Hanafi   School (that the Friday bath is nullified by having to renew one's ablution   after it) re-evaluated in light of a hadith by two of the school's   principal later scholars, 'Abd al-Ghani Nabulusi and Ibn 'Abidin. This is not exclusive to the Hanafi madhab  but all other schools have similar evaluations and developments made by their   leading accolades.[38] Conclusion: From the cursory discussion above it is   evidently clear that the statements by the four illustrious Imams 'when a   hadith is found to be authentic then that is my adopted position' and similar   remarks are to be understood in the proper context as explained above. A),   they were instructions to qualified individuals in fiqh and language. B),   they are encouragement for people to study language and fiqh with scholars. To understand these statement in any other   light than the way in which has been clarified is trying to interpolate the   comments of the Imams, which no classical scholar understood, to a meaning   they did not intend. Allāh knows best. References: [1] There has been much debate surrounding   the origins of Language. A number of theories have been forwarded. As far as   Islam is concerned. It is the believe and conviction of all believers that   God, Almighty, taught and instructed Adam (peace be upon him), the first   human on earth, the names and manufacturing of all things, “And He taught   Adam the names of all things then he presented them to the angels…” Thus from   the Islamic and Qur'anic paradigm language is a divine providence bestowed   upon man from the beginning of the human creation and not merely intelligent   human codification. The difference between human beings and animal: Human   beings, in contrast to other Animals, are capable of far more complex   communication and thinking. Communication is not unique to humans, but the   level of communication is of such a profoundly more rich and subtle nature as   to give rise to a shared conceptual world. This is the one of the most   important feature that distinguishes us from the animal kingdom. The   authoritative Atlas of Languages confirms this fact and also the fact that   animals can never be taught to speak. ''Language is perhaps the most   important single characteristic that distinguishes human beings from other   animal species. . . . Because of the different structure of the vocal   apparatus in humans and chimpanzees, it is not possible for chimpanzees to   imitate the sounds of human language, so they have been taught to use   gestures or tokens in place of sounds . . . but chimpanzees never attain a   level of linguistic complexity beyond the approximate level of a two-year-old   child.'' (Stephen Matthews, Bernard Comrie, and Marcia Polinsky, editors:   Atlas of Languages: The Origin and Development of Languages Throughout the   World (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 1996), p. 10.) Similarly, Lewis Thomas, the distinguished   medical scientist who was the long-time director and chancellor of the Sloan   Kettering Cancer Centre in Manhattan has affirmed that: ''. . . Language   is so incomprehensible a problem that the language we use for discussing the   matter is itself becoming incomprehensible.'' (Lewis Thomas, “On Science   and Uncertainty,” Discover (vol. 1, October 1980), p. 59). Dr. Noam Chomsky, Professor of Linguistics   at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, writes, ''Human language   appears to be a unique phenomenon, without significant analogue in the animal   world. . . . There is no reason to suppose that the “gaps” are bridgeable.   There is no more of a basis for assuming an evolutionary development of   “higher” from “lower” stages in this case, than there is for assuming an   evolutionary development from breathing to walking.'' (Noam Chomsky,   Language and Mind (New York: Harvourt, Brace, Jovan-ovich, 1972), pp. 67,   68). Not only is there no animal that is capable   of achieving anything like human speech, but also there is, at the other end   of the scale, no human tribe that does not have a true language. 'No language-less   community has ever been found.' There are no normal humans that cannot speak   and no animals that ever can. This is the great unbridgeable gap between all   mankind and every component of the animal kingdom. Therefore language is a   unique characteristic of the human creation and cannot be fully and   comprehensively imitated by any other known species in the universe. [2]Ibn 'Ashur, Maqasid p, 26 IIT, [3] Ibid [4] Ibn 'Ashur, Maqasid p, 27 IIT [5] Ibid [6] Hashiya of Ibn   'Abidin, Vol 1 p, 63. Iqadh Himam Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p.62. [7] Ibid [8] Iqadh Himam Ulil   albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 52 [9] Ibn Abd al Barr, Al-Intiqa fi fadhail   ath-thalatha al-aimmah al-fuqaha, p.145. [10] Al-Bani, Sifat Salatun Nabi, p.46. [11] Ibid [12] Iqadh Himam   Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 50. [13] Ibn Abd al Barr, Al-Intiqa fi fadhail   ath-thalatha al-aimmah al-fuqaha, p.144. [14] Ibn Abd al Barr, Jami' Bayan al-Ilm wa   fadhlihi, Vol 1, p.775 no, 1435. [15] Al Bani, Sifat Salatun nabi, p.49. [16] Iqadh Himam   Ulil albab by imām Salih al Fulani, p, 18. [17] Ibn Naim, Hilyatul Awlaiya, vol 9,   p.107. [18] Ibn Abi Hatim, Adab al-Shafi'I, p.94,   al-dhahabi, Siyar 'alam al-nubala, vol 10, p.35. [19] Ibn Abi Hatim, Adab al-Shafi'I, p.94,   Hilyatul awliya, vol 9 p.107, al-Bayhaqi, Manaqib al-Shafi'i, vol 1 p.473. [20] Al-Bayhaqi, Manaqib al-Shafi'i, vol 1,   p.475, al-Fulani, 63,100. [21] Ibn al-Qayyim, I'lam al-Muwaqqi'in, vol   2, p.361 [22] Ibid [23] An-Nawawi, Majmu', vol 1, p.63 [24] Ibn al-Qayyim, 'Ilam al-Muwaqi'in, vol   2, p.201 [25] Ibn Abd al-Barr, Jami' Bayan al-'Ilm,   vol 2, p.1072 no:2107 [26] Ibn al-Jawzi,   Manaqib imām Ahmad, p.172. [27] Ibn al-Qayyim, 'Ilam al-Muwaqi'in, vol   2, p. 201 [28] Al-Judai, Usul al-Fiqh, p.381 [29] Cited. Muḥammad   Ibn Umar al-Razi, Al-Mahsul, ed. Taha Jabir al-Alwani, vol.1, p.547-73. [30] Al-Nawawi,   al-Majmu' Sharh al-Muhadhdhab (1:64), citing Ibn al-ṣalāh's Fatawa wa Masa'il   (1:54, 1:58-59). Cf. al-Tahanawi, I'la' al-Sunan (2:290-291). [31] Hashiya of Ibn 'Abidin 1:68 [32] Ibn Abidin, Rasm al-Mufti, p.56. [33] This is an   authentic hadith that has been related by at least fifteen different   Companions. The most authentic narrations of these hadith, perhaps, are the   ones that reach us from the following Companions: Shidad b. Aws [Sunan Abi   Dawud (2368, 2369) and Sunan Ibn Majah (1681)] Thawban [Sunan Abu Dawud   (2367, 2370, and 2371) and Sunan Ibn Majah (1680)]. Rafi` b. Khadij [Sunan   al-Tirmidhi (774)]. This hadith is also related from Companions like `Ali b.   Abi Talib, Sa`d b. Abi Waqqas, `Abd Allāh b. `Umar, Ibn `Abbas, Abu Musa   al-Ash`ari, Abu Hurayrah, Bilal, Usamah b. Zayd, `A'ishah, and Safiyyah. Its   chains of transmission are indeed numerous. [34] Sunan al-Nasa'i al-Kubra (3224, 3228)   and Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah (1967) [35] Radd al-muhtar (9.00), 1.114 [36] Bukhāri (9.00),   2.3–4: 881 [37] Radd al-muhtar (9.00), 1.114 [38] This part was taken from the article   linked. For a further detailed discussion please refer here: http://abdullahhasan.net/?p=5285 | |||||
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Understanding: “When a Hadith is Sahih it is my Madhab”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
 
No comments:
Post a Comment