Abdur Rahman ibn Yusuf Mangera – Why Follow A Madhab Instead Of Sahih Hadith

paycheck for agreeing for an interview for the 100 config

channel. Just a few questions that we have that the brothers have

been requesting and asking, especially when it comes to the

issue of tech lead. Many brothers say that why is it that we only

have to follow one particular Imam, when we can just take the

authentic opinion from amongst the Imams? And just follow that?

The issue in following the school is that

if you, number one to determine what is an authentic opinion

within a school, is what's going to be difficult for most people to

do. How do you determine what is authentic, and what is not

authentic? Each month, and the scholars of each school they

actually consider whatever they believe to be the most authentic

opinion in something. So, you know, for a common person to be

able to understand what is the most authentic opinion, it

requires scholarship, and people who have that level of

scholarship. And then obviously, they

have their own HD HUD that they can that they can follow.

So

I think what we need to

look at here is that for a normal person to just pick and choose

from whatever they want, it's highly problematic. And the reason

why it's problematic is because there's two issues. Number one,

there's the issue of

taking whatever you you're knifes feels to be the easiest. So then

you start looking for the simplest things. And many without would

argue that that's not what we're looking for. We're looking for

authenticity. Now the thing is that how do you determine

authenticity, somebody has to

tell you, or you have to do research to back your stand that

this particular aspect is authentic, it may just be that you

have been exposed to Hadith that support a particular opinion,

maybe the Shafi opinion or maybe the Halevi opinion in a particular

in a particular issue. But you haven't seen the de Lille for the

others. So he actually requires a lot of actually requires a lot of

research, which most people aren't able to do. Thirdly, one of the

other problems with following whatever, as such, you know,

whatever you feel like one of the problems. The third problem with

that, is that you are then if it's not based on evidence, which

requires research, if it's not based on evidence, then it would

actually require you to just choose whatever you want. The

problem there is that it would it would consider it would cause you

to be following different different opinions based on

different methodologies. So for instance,

when it comes to the Hanafi school, and the Hanafi, is they

say that it's okay to or rather they say that touching a woman

does not break your window.

As long as there's no emission, it doesn't break your window, whereas

the Shafi is they say that it does break your window, while the

Hanafi is in another issue say that

bleeding does break you do while as the Shafi say that it doesn't

break your window, if somebody takes the opinion of the Hanafis

in one thing, and the shaft is another thing in the sense that he

reckons that my will do is not broken when I've touched my wife

and my will do is also not broken when I've made a sorry if I've

bled then he is taking the two opinions too liberal opinions from

two different Imams. The problem is the problem with that is that

he is taking the conclusions of two different sets of methodology.

Because the methodology that was used by Imam Abu Hanifa and the

Hanafi aroma imams in general, to reach the conclusion that bleeding

does break your will to

bleeding when the blood flows from its place does break your window

while touching a woman doesn't. They use a particular methodology

to arrive at a conclusion. While the Shafi is using their own

unique methodology, Which Imam Shafi formulated based on his

understanding of the Quran, sunnah, he came to the absolute

opposite conclusions in both of these issues. Now, if you're going

to take one opinion from here one opinion from there, you are

literally taking the conclusions of two different sets of

methodology. And that is, I mean, absolutely absurd to do that,

because, you know, whatever you do, it has to be consistent. It

has to be according to a single methodology. So I would believe

that that's that would be you can say a technical problem, a

technical reason for not being able to just pick and choose.

That's basically when we're talking about free pick and

choosing. There is certain adopt for when a person can move over

from one month up to another one school to another. And there are

certain requirements for that. Some have

Your other mouth the opinion that if there is a absolute need, then

it is permissible to you know take from another school, but then what

they do qualify that with is they say that you have to then observe

all of the different rulings according to So, if you were to

take the Shafi opinion for example, on combining the prayers,

then you will have to then consider your window broken if you

touch to your wife for men, and vice versa for women for instance.

So, you would then have to observe all of the flick of Shafi

according or pertaining to that particular issue, when you took

from the Shafi school this is according to some Hanafi aromas,

or ADAMA, whereas other rhythm, they are the Hanafi aroma, they,

especially those of the subcontinent, they consider it,

absolutely, you know, that they are a lot more strict in not

allowing individuals to just go across multiple lines, because it

obviously opens the door to a lot of pick and choosing eventually,

what they say is that when you do take from another month, it needs

to be a group effort to do that. So, for example, if there is an

issue in the Hanafi school, which is really difficult for the

community in general, and there is another opinion within the Hanafi

school or in another school, then if Earlimart get together and they

determined that this is a valid reason for coming out of this

school, then it may be you know that then they would deem that to

be okay to follow another opinion of another school because you have

to realize here that we're talking about a

a formulated methodology, results of that methodology, a whole fixed

system, entire school that has come, you know, for this many

centuries in order to go against that, that scholarship. If you

just did that arbitrarily. You'd be completely disregarding all of

these great scholars of the past and clearly I mean, these great

scholars of the past could not have been so naive to have just

followed something that they would not consider strong or whatever.

So yeah, hopefully that should give some explanation Inshallah,

of this