[sally]

Originally Posted by AceOfHearts

This is the sorry state of the nation. Islam is about this science and that science, and this madhadb and that ruling and derivation and the 'technicalities' and what not. People think that is what Islam is and drive others away from it making religion seem like a complex puzzle in which one part they avoid and some they are allowed in.

Islam is very simply. It is to believe in Allah and the Last Day and to obey His commands as stated in the Qur'an. Its so simple. Because now people do not follow this simple principle, they also dont fear Allah as they should. This is why Muslims are powerless today. The simply message of Islam communicated in the Qur'an and as originally communicated by the Prophet, is long lost.

Only when people begin to follow the Qur'an, can hope to be enlightened and be on their way to becoming a true believer.

islam is simple that's why we have supplement/commentary from the Prophet SAW to make interpretation easier.

plus the Quran says he's our role model and we should strive to be like him

i feel like i may have already written this post to you like 500,000,000,000 times

[AceOfHearts]

Originally Posted by sally

islam is simple that's why we have supplement/commentary from the Prophet SAW to make interpretation easier.

plus the Quran says he's our role model and we should strive to be like him

i feel like i may have already written this post to you like 500,000,000,000 times

Prophet Ibrahim was also a "role-model". Do you strive to be like him? If so, how?

peace.

[sally]

Originally Posted by AceOfHearts

Prophet Ibrahim was also a "role-model". Do you strive to be like him? If so, how?

peace.

Prophet SAW already tells us everything we need to know in Hadith, including pertinent information that we need from and about Prophet Ibrahim A.S and others.

[Hanbali]

Originally Posted by riad19

bro, again, please show me an example of an opinion which is the "truth" and doesnt exist in any one of the 4 schools. if you cant, then your whole argument is just pointless blabbering.



so instead of following one of the 4 established schools which has the opinions of hundreds of scholars, one should just make taqleed of one scholar? the anti-madhab arguments are always ridiculous. why would you wanna follow one scholar where you can follow an entire school. in the schools of fiqh, each opinion is evaluated by many reliable scholars and either verified or rejected to establish a dominant opinion of the school. there is less chance of an error with following a madhab as opposed to following a "reliable scholar".

You obviously did not read the article at all. All your arguments have been dealt with.

Perhaps you so-called 'traditionalists' will listen to the advice of Imam an-Nawawi (ra) whom you always love to quote! Let us see what Imam an-Nawawi (ra) says:

“What is dictated by the evidence is that a person is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab; rather he should ask whoever he wishes.”

Your post indicates that you have not read the article AT ALL, since the article does not at all say that a person must follow only ONE scholar. Please read the article and then speak.

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by Hanbali

Perhaps you so-called 'traditionalists' will listen to the advice of Imam an-Nawawi (ra) whom you always love to quote! Let us see what Imam an-Nawawi (ra) says:

“What is dictated by the evidence is that a person is not obliged to adhere to a Madhab; rather he should ask whoever he wishes.”

Yeah, but that doesn't say to seek an opinion outside of the 4 madhabs. Just that one is not required to adhere to ONE. I do by and large adhere to the Hanafi madhab - because it's what I know best, and because Hanafi scholars are very accessible - but I personally agree w/ that. I think the agreed upon opinion is that it's best to know the basics and generally follow one madhab, but it's ok to follow rulings from other madhabs.

(and I'm sure you know Imam an-Nawawi (RA) was a Shafi)

[Hanbali]

Originally Posted by sixpakistan

Yeah, but that doesn't say to seek an opinion outside of the 4 madhabs.

Who ever said we should seek opinions outside the four madhaib?

I think the agreed upon opinion is that it's best to know the basics and generally follow one madhab, but it's ok to follow rulings from other madhabs.

No, it is not an agreed upon position at all. Please read the article insha-Allah.

(and I'm sure you know Imam an-Nawawi (RA) was a Shafi)

Imam an-Nawawi (ra) was not a layperson. This article is only about laypersons.

I repeat: please do not post in this thread if you have not read the article.

[AceOfHearts]

Originally Posted by sally

Prophet SAW already tells us everything we need to know in Hadith, including pertinent information that we need from and about Prophet Ibrahim A.S and others.

Your source for your claim was a Quranic Verse which states about the Prophet Muhammad that he was "Uswatun Hasanatun", the Qur'an says the same "Uswatun Hasanatun" about the Prophet Ibrahim including the bit "whoever seeks Allah and the Last Day".

From a Quranic point, it makes no sense why you look at the two Verses from two very different ways. This means you either did not know that the Prophet Ibrahim had been described in exactly the same words (and came up with your explenation there and then), or you choose to remain ignorant of those other Verses and quote Verses to prove a belief that you gained before hand from else where.

peace be to you.

[sixpakistan]

Originally Posted by Hanbali

No, it is not an agreed upon position at all. Please read the article insha-Allah.

Imam an-Nawawi (ra) was not a layperson. This article is only about laypersons.

I repeat: please do not post in this thread if you have not read the article.

too long. can you summarize?

[sally]

Originally Posted by AceOfHearts

Your source for your claim was a Quranic Verse which states about the Prophet Muhammad that he was "Uswatun Hasanatun", the Qur'an says the same "Uswatun Hasanatun" about the Prophet Ibrahim including the bit "whoever seeks Allah and the Last Day".

From a Quranic point, it makes no sense why you look at the two Verses from two very different ways. This means you either did not know that the Prophet Ibrahim had been described in exactly the same words (and came up with your explenation there and then), or you choose to remain ignorant of those other Verses and quote Verses to prove a belief that you gained before hand from else where.

peace be to you.

what am i making up? i didnt even quote anything. i dont know what you're talking about. anyways, i don't wanna continue this. have a good day.

[AceOfHearts]

Peace,

Fair enough. But leave knowing that at this moment you hold erroneous intepretations of the Qur'an. Please read all the Verses of the Qur'an and try to understand them in light of one another.

peace be to you.

[Abu_Hind]

Originally Posted by riad19

that statement is completely ignorant. first of all, the 4 madhaahib dont have just one opinion on a certain issue, but rather there is a dominant opinion and a lot of other opinions that arent the dominant point of view. to say that the "truth" may lay outside of the opinions of the 4 madhaahib, is an indication and using very poor choice of words, which also completely undermine the fact that the opinions are always based on quran and sunnah and often comes down to the usuls of the madhahib.

so all the opinions are based on truth, but one may feel more comfortable following one opinion over the other.

besides, give me an example of an opinion on an issue that you feel is the truth, which doesnt exist in any of the 4 madhaahib. otherwise, stop with the hypotheticals, its neither here nor there.

Assalamu alaikum,

Akhi with all due respect your statement is a completely ignorant one. Maybe you should think twice before accusing a Mujtahid Imam of being ignorant. Perhaps its the baggage the name of Ibn Tayimiah carries in some corrupt minds that made you blurt out such a statement. Husn al-dhann does wonders you know.

I think you have totally misunderstood what the shaykh ul-islam meant. If you were acqauinted with his works or opinions you would know that most of his opinions lie within the 4 madhhahib, and those that do not are his own ijtihaad OR opinions of the early salaf or scholars whose madhhabs ONCE existed (such as al-layth, thawri etc...) based on his own research (as he's recognized as a mujtahid by many and a mujtahid in Hanbali madhhab by all).

So what is most likely meant by his words (and I agree it's a poor choice of words conveying his opinion) that an opinion can lie outside the madhhab in the sense that it was held by scholars who were either mujtahid, from the salaf, the sahabah, or whose madhhab is not extant anymore.

Never did Ibn Tayimiah ever insinuate discrediting the madhhahib as he himself was a Hanbali. And his defence of madhhabs other than his own can be seen in works such as his treatise in defence of 'Amal of ahl al-madinah (an english trans. by Aisha Bewley is available.)


WAllahu a'alam.