Also, the reason that understanding is necessary in matters of aqeeda is not because of greater or lesser difficulty, but it is because sincerity in action requires it.

If someone does not really know that there is no God but Allah and the Prophet is His Messenger, then how can he really follow the fiqh with the intention of obeying Allah and His Messenger?

Thus the proofs of these propositions must be made as clear to him as possible.

Aqeeda is simple and deep. It is easy to get it right, but the levels of deeper understanding are potentially infinite. But the mandatory for us normal folks is just to get it right.

Fiqh is complicated, and we have to get it right. It is very hard to cover all the bases, be aware of all the relevant textual evidence, relevant contextual circumstances, possible counter-evidences, etc. So, only the mujtahid can handle it, and they are very few. So, in my opinion it is best to follow a the madhabs (not of course to be chauvinistic toward one).

I find that people that seem to ENJOY making fatwas and telling others what to do, typically have a lower standard of evidence and proof, and thus a lower standard for what counts as a mujtahid. They denounce taqlid as “blind following,” until they give you their fatwa, at which point they claim to have produced “proof,” and demand from you “itibba” – which really IS blind following.

So, they want us to stop our justified following of the four Imams, and start blindly following them!

Ibn Hazm, The Ahlul Hadeeth, Shah Wali Allah, Shaukani and the staunchest people on this issue all agree that the layman who has no ability to study must go to the alim.

But that only becomes taqleed if he obeys the alim without enquiring or recieving an indication that the ruling is from Allah and His Messenger.

What’s the difference you might ask between asking for proof or not?

The difference is that the one who seeks to follow the proof is trying to fulfill the command of Allah the Almighty in which slave is required to make ittiba’ of what has been revealed.

But the one who obeys blindly is following Zann which Allah has forbidden.

Anyhow I think it’s high time that something comprehensive was released in the english language which explains the stance in detail of those that hold taqleed to be prohibited.

And, please read what I wrote above: It’s the intention and methodology that really defines if someone is doing taqleed or not. Clearly, the methodology Shaykh Lahori describes is not taqleed and is the balance approach of most—from ibn Taymiyyah, to Shawkani, many scholars of najd, of ahle hadith scholars in Pakistan, etc. In fact, I can say for sure this would be the opinion of al-Albani as well (although I haven’t read one) because there is no way he can say to normal people, open Quran and hadith and fiqh books and come to your own conclusion. Again, it’s the methodology, intention and belief that differentiates a muqallid and ghayr muqallid.

I’ll give you a practical example: You know that Islamic Finder Adhan software—it gives the option of having Asr time by ‘Standard’ method, that’s the method of the last three imams, and the ‘Hanafi’ method. Now, I know people who will not want to change to Standard method or inquire about it or be curious about it—they will just keep it on Hanafi method. That is taqleed! Now, I won’t lie and say I’ve looked into the Hanafi ruling, but I intend to do so inshaAllah, and the only reason I haven’t is due to laziness and the belief that three imams say one thing and one imam says another and on this matter it would be extremely unlikely for three imams to reach a wrong conclusion while Hanafis alone reach at the correct conclusion.

1. Not all muslims are same, some are very knowledgable, some very laymen, and some in between.

2. There is difference between taqlid blind-following and taqlid of someone till it is proven that what person is doing has either:
a. No basis in Quran and Sunnah
b. Very weak, and stronger opinion exists, and majority follow that
c. Safer opinion exists.

3. Temporary Taqlid. Many times people ask me questions (even though I have no knowledge whatsoever, nor I am student of knowledge), I tell them that I been told by so and so scholar this fatwa, so if you like follow it for now, till you or I meet sheikh and ask him directly.

4. Taqlid of parents by their children.

Now when people say they follow madhab, I am little bit surprised, because I do not know if its possible. Why? Because madhab like Islam itself many times does not have unanimous opinion. Hanafi of Egypt have many different opinions than hanafi of Indo-Pak. People can not be following imam abu hanifa either, because 2/3 of his fatawas were not adopted by his immediate students. And it kept changing from place to place and time to time. So only thing possible for a layman when he says he follows a madhab, would be that he follow a scholar of that madhab at his place.

Now personally I would not be comfortable following my local imam if I know he is going to reiterate fatawa of his madhab, regardless if its weak or strong. I would like to do taqlid of a true scholar who can say what opinion is stronger. I may do temporary taqlid of someone who may not be of that level, but would be looking for someone who knows in depth.

Also I find it sad that some people go in lengths saying that I can proove that every position of my madhab has some basis in Quran and Sunnah. To me its reverse logic. We should not pick up madhab/opinion and find proofs for it, rather we should pick up Quran and Sunnah and try to adopt opinion and adjust madhab to it. I mean Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) and other scholars clearly said, this is my opinion, if you get hadith contrary to my opinion, then thats my madhab.

Don’t get me wrong, I have espoused this same position before, but it just seems to mask what it really is.

jazakallahkhair

Also I think these statements that start with “All Muslims…” and “Every single Muslim” should perhaps be placed under the chapter of ‘False Ijma’, since logically it is impossible for anyone to check if ‘All Muslims’ are doing taqleed. You can guess, but your guess will be based on uncertainty and amount to nothing but your personally expressed opinion, which is fine as this is the internet.

The issues of fiqh could be divided into two logical sections (for our purposes):

1. Those that are clear in the book and Sunnah or where the Salaf have differed over their understanding of a text. Then it would not be taqleed to accept any of those opinions based on the text.

2. Those that require ijtihad. As for these then it may be possible that in some constricted circumstances that an individual may fall into taqleed. But for the most part they can remain free from it.

Here are some exceptions to your “Every Muslim” statement:

1. The Ulema. Since according to at least some of the madhabs “The muqallid is not an Alim”.

2. The tulaab ul ilm, at least of the Ahlul Hadeeth and Zaahiriyyah.

3. Those Muslims that have knowledge of their deen to the degree that they fall into the category of ‘Mutabbi’, or the one that follows with proof.

But I concur that the majority of Muslims today follow a madhab in some fashion. But that in and of itself does not make it correct.

Anyhow I love you all for the sake of Allah, the muqaalidoon of you and the tullab ul ilm of you.

Let this issue not be a dividing factor. Let it be one of the many issues that we can discuss without raising emotions. Let it be based on knowledge.

May Allah forgive us all and guide us all to His Straight Path.

agreed – even those who say its absoloutely impermissable to make taqleed of a madhhab or still following *someone* in their interpretations of the texts

That does not require a long answer.