Follow Islam vs. follow Madhab

[Abu_Hind]

Rejection of taqleed is the gateway to modernism.

[Bluestar]

modernism can be seen as a phenomena, a mixture of the good and the bad like any other time. It's tiring and to be honest, quite unintellectual to believe it's some evil force that's threatening Islam. Islam has existed in many varied cultures, it's been carried on through centuries. I think you undermine it when you think of modernity as a threat.

I think it's a lack of education that you might be referring to and even that is presumptious.

[Abu_Hind]

Bluestar said

modernism is a phenomena, a mixture of the good and the bad like any other time. It's tiring and to be honest, quite unintellectual to believe it's some evil force that's threatening Islam. Islam has existed in many varied cultures, it's been carried on through centuries. I think you undermine it when you think of modernity as a threat.

I think it's a lack of education that you might be referring to and even that is presumptious.

You obviously have no idea in what context modernism is being referred to here, or even what facet of modernism is being scrutinized. Why don't you spare islam your eurocentric judgemental banter.

[jinnzaman]

Bluestar said

modernism is a phenomena, a mixture of the good and the bad like any other time. It's tiring and to be honest, quite unintellectual to believe it's some evil force that's threatening Islam. Islam has existed in many varied cultures, it's been carried on through centuries. I think you undermine it when you think of modernity as a threat.

I think it's a lack of education that you might be referring to and even that is presumptious.

What's your definition of modernity and how do you separate it from Westernization?

[Jaysh]

jinnzaman said

Ibn Hazm related that the Sahabah engaged in taqleed of seven of the fuqaha. If you research how the Sahabah (radhi allahu anhum) engaged in fiqh, its essentially the same as following a madhab.

I essentially take Ibn Hazm's view on the matter. I've already posted his view on the matter, so I don't think I need to reiterate it.

Jaysh, do you really expect people who have no knowledge of the Qur'an, Arabic, or basic sciences of hadeeth, let alone usul al fiqh, to be able to adequately weigh opinions?

No.

The layperson asks the scholar, and the scholar is equipped to take an opinion without doing taqleed of a madhab.

Wallahu Aalim.

[jinnzaman]

Jaysh said

I essentially take Ibn Hazm's view on the matter. I've already posted his view on the matter, so I don't think I need to reiterate it.

No.

The layperson asks the scholar, and the scholar is equipped to take an opinion without doing taqleed of a madhab.

Wallahu Aalim.

Would you extend this right to a hafidh al-Quran?

[Jaysh]

jinnzaman said

Would you extend this right to a hafidh al-Quran?

I refuse to answer this question, because I think I might be Jinnzacanned. Please see my latest post in the Jinnzaword thread.

[Bluestar]

Abu_Hind said

You obviously have no idea in what context modernism is being referred to here, or even what facet of modernism is being scrutinized. Why don't you spare islam your eurocentric judgemental banter.

You often indirectly accuse anyone who argues with you as being ignorant. It shows your insecurities. If you were referring to a specific context/facet (i.e. excuse of not knowing what you're talking about) then maybe you should have been more specific.

jinnzaman said

What's your definition of modernity and how do you separate it from Westernization?

Modernity and post-modernity are labels of periods. There are no clear distinctions of where they began and when they end. Most of the time, people don't even know what they characterise. Personally, i think people use them because:

a) they don't like current times and need to give it a name
b) they want to sound clever.

I think the terms are invalid. Time is continuous and there are too many recurring patterns in this world to think of it as being separated into distinct periods.

Westernisation is the progression of an empire but it is also a culture that time has separated from that empire.

I don't write this with absolute certainty that I am right. After all the knowledge that we have is only a collection of what we are surrounded with. What is right could consist of multiple things or just one thing that some people believe is right and others don't. In other words, allahu alim.

[Jaysh]

Abu Hind, I demand you change your avatar. It confuses me with me.

[spicyhijabi]

Jaysh said

Abu Hind, I demand you change your avatar. It confuses me with me.

ME too

[jinnzaman]

Bluestar said

Modernity and post-modernity are labels of periods. There are no clear distinctions of where they began and when they end. Most of the time, people don't even know what they characterise. Personally, i think people use them because:

a) they don't like current times and need to give it a name
b) they want to sound clever.

I think the terms are invalid. Time is continuous and there are too many recurring patterns in this world to think of it as being separated into distinct periods.

Westernisation is the progression of an empire but it is also a culture that time has separated from that empire.

I don't write this with absolute certainty that I am right. After all the knowledge that we have is only a collection of what we are surrounded with. What is right could consist of multiple things or just one thing that some people believe is right and others don't. In other words, allahu alim.

I think you have no idea what modernity entails.

[m_ali_qazi]

Abu_Hind said

You obviously have no idea in what context modernism is being referred to here, or even what facet of modernism is being scrutinized. Why don't you spare islam your eurocentric judgemental banter.

1. stay calm, no need to get a rise

2. what if someone argued that taqleed is prone to having religious power centralized to a few individuals.

[jinnzaman]

m_ali_qazi said

1. stay calm, no need to get a rise

2. what if someone argued that taqleed is prone to having religious power centralized to a few individuals.

But following a madhab is the precise opposite of that. Firstly, its more similar to a guild than political power. The people who we do taqleed of have been dead for centuries, sometimes for a millenium. Whatever political popwer they had is long gone. Secondly, the madhab isn't limited to a few individuals, but comprise thousands of scholars that are constantly cross-checking their schools opinion in lieu of new evidences or new circumstances to reinterpret things. If the madhab was truly one of taqleed alone, then the opinions of a madhab wouldn't change. The arguments against taqleed are largely rhetorical. If you look at the substance of the discourse, the charges against following a madhab are almost all entirely baseless.

[Bluestar]

jinnzaman said

I think you have no idea what modernity entails.

I think that you fail to realise it's a perception; a way of cataloguing time, like a clock.

[jinnzaman]

Bluestar said

I think that you fail to realise it's a perception; a way of cataloguing time, like a clock.

well, i'm just curious where you got your understanding of modernity from. which books and authors or journals? if you see how its treated among specialists, your conception is completely different. yes, there's a split between philosophers and political-economists on these terms, but not the way you've described it.