Channel: Bilal Philips
© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.
Salam Alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh me Peace, blessings and mercy of lost me and all of you.
We start today's program with recitation of the Holy Quran
he mean a shave on your ggmbh
man your army
Lika UBA no wha hola como
The translation from Surah imraan chapter three, verses 102 and 103.
I seek refuge with a wolf from Satan the occurs in the name of a wolf, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
Oh you who believes, Fear Allah, as he should be feared, and die not except in a state of Islam
and holdfast all together by the rope which Allah stretches out for you, and be not divided among yourselves. And remember, with gratitude, Allah favor on you, for you were enemies, and he joined your hearts in love, so that by His grace, you become brethren.
And you were on the brink of the pit of fire, and he saved you from it does does a lot make his science clear to you, that you may be guided. Verily, Allah has opened the throat.
For those of you who have come to the Islamic Research Foundation for the first time, let me brief you about the activities of IRS. Islamic Research Foundation was established in 1991 with the objective of removing misconceptions amongst the non Muslims as well as Muslims
towards that direction. IRS has used the Quran and the Sunnah as the basis of our efforts.
Besides the Quran and the Sunnah,
we have used reason, logic and modern scientific knowledge to explain the basic tenets of Islam in a very clear fashion
Alhamdulillah the Islamic Research Foundation has the largest collection of video cassettes and its reference library
and every morning and hamdulillah the IRF cassettes are shown on the cable network in Bombay as well as other cities in India.
towards developing this, these cassettes, the IRF has a full fledged beta cam, editing studio,
recording studio and other facilities to make these cassettes available as and when required. The motto of the Islamic Research Foundation can be found in Surah, Chapter 16 verse 125, it says who Illa Seville era bakeable hikma palmarosa till has Anna Machado whom Villa de de arson when translated means in white all the way of the Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching.
And argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious
in doing so, and following this principle of the Holy Quran, this verse of the Holy Quran Alhamdulillah IRF has been implementing and applying in this direction since the past seven years.
towards that direction. We also have various programs on Saturdays, Sundays and Mondays where there are lectures followed by question answer sessions today as well. We have amongst ourselves Dr. Abu Amina Bilal Phillips,
who is going to speak on the topic, the evolution of
Dr. Amina Bilal Philips was born in Jamaica, but grew up in Canada, where he accepted Islam in 1972. He completed a diploma in Arabic and a BA from the College of Islamic disciplines at the Islamic University of Medina in 1979.
Then he completed an MA in Islamic theology in 1985, followed by a PhD in Islamic theology in 1994.
He taught Islamic education in Arabic in private schools in Riyadh for over 10 years.
between 1992 and 1994, Dr. Bilal established and lectured in the graduate and undergraduate departments of Islamic Studies in the College of Education of Sharif carbon Swan Islamic University in Cotabato city Mindanao, Philippines. Since 94, he has founded and directed the Islamic Information Center in Dubai, UAE, and the Department of Foreign Languages has at Dar Al Fatah Islamic press in Sharjah.
Presently he's also a professor at the American University in the UAE. His works have been translated in several languages, and he has lectured extensively throughout the world.
Among his published works are translations of ignat amias essay on the jinn,
the devil's deception, Arabic calligraphy and in manuscripts. He has co authored polygamy in Islam. He has authored evolution of Islamic law, the seal Surah Al hoogenraad, the encircled fundamentals of tawheed salvation through repentance, Islamic Studies, Book One, two and 300 and omura. According to the Quran and Sunnah, Islamic rules on menstruation, Arabic reading and writing Made Easy Arabic grammar Made Easy, the best in Islam, the purpose of creation and dream interpretation according to the Quran and Sunnah. He has also authored the true message of Jesus, the exhaustive tradition on Islam and funeral rites in Islam.
It's a great, great pleasure that Dr. Abu Amina Willa Phillips is with us today to speak, as I said, on the topic, the evolution of IP, I would request not travel. I mean, I've allowed Philips to address us
in Al Hamdulillah, and
we're not allowed to be let him in surely I'm fusina Omen sejati. I'm Elena, Maya de la, la la la,
la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la, la sharika, Allah,
Mohammed Abdul Sulu. All praise is due to alarm, your laws, peace and blessings be on his last prophet muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
And it is our duty to not only praise Allah subhanaw taala but to seek refuge in Him from the evil which is in ourselves and the evil which results from our deeds, for whomsoever Allah has allowed to go astray in and can guide and whomsoever lies guided, none consent the street.
And I bear witness that there is no god worthy of worship but Allah and that Muhammad Sallallahu wasallam is the last messenger of Allah.
The topic as announced this evening is that of the evolution of fear, or Islamic law.
And this topic is actually a very vast topic, which I really cannot hope to cover in the one hour which is allotted to me. So I will basically only give you the headings and touch some of the major issues.
And for details of it, there is a book which I've written called the evolution of IP, which goes into the finer details of the issues with regards to the process by which Islamic law has evolved over time, to the present day, really focusing on how Muslims should approach Islamic law.
This was an issue
Particularly to me, having become a Muslim, initially in Toronto,
where my first learnings of Islam, were with
people who are associated with the Jamaat.
And those who taught me taught me the Hanafi School of Islamic law,
and impressed on me that it was important that I be a hanafy.
Because most Muslims are honeybees.
And I accepted that
returned and informed my family that we are now hanafis.
After having done that, then
I lived and worked with a brother from Egypt, his father was one of the scholars involved in the movement, the one movement in Egypt,
and he was quite knowledgeable about himself about Islamic law, etc. and I studied Arabic with him.
And in the course of studying, you know, I came to realize that while he was a Shafi, and
there were some strong arguments for the opinions which he held.
So it left me in something of a dilemma.
And I decided at that point, really, that I needed to find out for myself,
what, in fact, is the correct position based on the sources of Islam, and rather than taking it secondhand, you know, from somebody who got from somebody else, you know, or trying to have people read books to me or translate certain passages from books to me, I felt that this was just not really leading to clarity for myself. So I felt it was necessary to go and study for myself and have the law applied to study in Medina, as was mentioned in the
I learned Arabic there and studied in the university.
And I got an understanding or clarity about Islam, from its sources, which led to rest for me, the problems which existed in my mind, as a new Muslim,
wherein I found myself in a position where I was forced to,
to accept things,
I had rejected as a concept in Christianity.
I had rejected the idea that
God is three and yet one, at the same time, this was something which was quite illogical.
knew and, and realize that what Christians were doing was they were turning off their sense of logic, their sense of, of
reason, to accept this.
And here I was, in coming into Islam,
believing Of course, at first Islam was one, you know, whereas Christianity had so many different sects, etc. and then coming into find there are some differences here also. And furthermore, there were issues where
one school of thought was saying, This is permissible. And another school of thought was saying this is not permissible.
Where one was saying, if you did this, you have lost your state of evolution, you no longer have will do. Another one said that you do have ablution.
These were differences or contradictions to me, which really couldn't coexist.
And for me to accept, as I was told, in the early days, that all of the schools of Islamic law, were correct. The important thing was just that you had to follow one.
Right. And as I said, it was stressed to me that the Hanafi one was the best one to follow.
But the key was you have to follow one but they were all correct.
It meant then, that I had to accept that it is possible for a person to be in a state of Voodoo and yet not be in that state of Voodoo at the same time.
I said this was something my brain told me this can be
my my mind told me this was not something possible.
But if I was to accept
blindly this idea that yes, it's all correct, then this is, in fact what my brain had to do, I had to turn off my brain, I had to stop thinking, don't think about this, you just accept it and carry on.
and hamdulillah through my own personal studies in Medina, and elsewhere, I got the clarity which resolve these issues for me. And having understood that, then I tried to pass that information on to others. This is
we could say this lecture is an extension of that. The book which I wrote on the topic, I think, really covers it in far greater detail than I would possibly be able to do this evening.
But I can say briefly,
that from the very beginning,
the resolution of the conflict,
of the differences amongst the schools of thought,
led to and has led to
two extreme attitudes.
in which some people have totally rejected the schools of Islamic law altogether
as being irrelevant.
And what that has led to
where people have not got disciplined, Islamic legal background is deviation,
because the human mind now starts to make judgments and interpretations without a solid foundation.
The other extreme
was that these schools were divinely ordained, and one had to be chosen.
And this also historically had led to a fanaticism
in the oma
some of the effects of which we'll discuss later,
but it became a part and parcel
of the problem of cultural Islam.
among Muslims, were the foundations of Islam, the Quran and the Sunnah no longer
played the major role that it did in the lives of the early Muslims. Instead,
it became, the decisions were made based on opinions of opinions of opinions.
So when a person was confronted with or presented with something from the Quran, or from the Sunnah,
the response would be,
I am a hanafy.
We don't do this.
Or I'm a Shafi and we shall face don't do this, this would be the traditionalist response.
And, in fact,
when we actually go to the root of many of these issues, we will actually find that the Hanafi school never took this position. And the Shafi school never took that position. But that it is just a cultural practice amongst Muslims in a particular area. And because they were from the Hanafi school, most of the scholars of that era from the Hanafi school, they assumed that whatever they're doing was from the Hanafi school, people were no longer able to distinguish between what was actually legally a part of Islam, from what is a product of their own cultural inheritance, or adaptations, etc.
This is one of the major problems I feel facing the Muslim world today.
And one of the points I think we need to look at before actually going into the issues of the evolution of law is really what is meant by fit Islamic law itself.
Now, when we use the term Shetty,
and we use the term fit
these in the minds of most people I see nonnamous.
But the fact of the matter is that there are not
there is a distinction, a clear distinction between the two there
but they are not one in the same.
fifth or the sherea, we can say briefly
represents the totality of divinely revealed laws, what is from the Quran? And what is from the Sunnah, what is based on revelation
and as such, it has the quality of
not changing with time, they said he fixed,
it is fixed, it will not change, it cannot change, Muslims are not allowed to change it.
Whereas, Philip, on the other hand,
represents the application of the Sharia,
to varying circumstances,
taking different parts and aspects of the Sharia and applying it where needed in the various human
circumstances, locations, experiences.
So, what we're talking about in the case of fit is not divine revelation,
but human interpretation.
This is why
the basis of this issue of the even the term fix itself
is from a Hadeeth reported in both Sahih al Bukhari and Muslim that Prophet Mohammed Salim had said, My unity law will be higher than your deen at whoever Allah which is good for, he gives him
of the religion gives him a deep understanding, meaning to understand the deep understanding of the religion. So sick is human reasoning in the application of the Sharia.
Either the direct application of the Sharia or
the application of
the goals of the Sharia.
a principle which is based on understanding human understanding
is one which
Because human understanding will vary in time,
any given issue
that we attempt to deal with
we'll be according to the knowledge that is available to us.
And 10 years from now
20 years from now, our knowledge may change.
the issue concerning smoking
is an issue,
which is a pressing issue
plaguing the Muslim world today.
plaguing the Muslim world today. Cigarette smoking is at the peak in the world in the Muslim countries today.
They did surveys in Turkey.
They found that in
primaries school, that well over 50% of the children are smoking in primary school.
So you can imagine what the situation of the adults is smoking.
Now the ruling which was made concerning smoking
500 years ago, when tobacco first came to the Ottoman
and the scholars made a judgement on it. They made a judgement based on the information available to them.
They looked at smoking and they looked at the effects
to see what effects there are if there are any negative effects then they could make their ruling on the basis of it. What they found was that the only harm that they could see coming from smoking was it produced bad breath
breath is well known.
In the west there are many products which are sold to cover it, you know, sprays people use in their mouths, etc. so that the smokers breath will not be as noticeable.
So they went back to the shediac to find a ruling from the Sharia with regards to things which cause bad breath. And what they found, of course, are authentic ideas from Prophet Mohammed wa sallam in which he said those who eat garlic, raw garlic and onions should not come to our masters.
Those who eat raw garlic and onions shouldn't come to us. It produces bad breath
uncomfortable when somebody turns to you and salon says Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah wa. He was even eating garlic onion, very uncomfortable. So to protect the prayers, people were in their prayers from the harm which will come problems as lm said, Don't come to our masters, pray at home.
Now, anything which is going to deprive you
of the additional benefits of praying in the masjid in Jamaat, which is 25 to 27 times greater than praying a tome,
it has to be something disliked.
So this is how the scholars extracted the ruling, this is disliked.
So from the dislike, status mcru of eating raw onions and garlic
and going to masters, they took that ruling and applied it to smoking. So 500 years ago, they ruled that it was my crew.
There were scholars, even from that time, one should mention that still held that it was around. But the vast majority went with the position that it was my crew.
They felt it was wrong from the point of view that, you know, it was a waste of wealth. It was just destroying a person as well. There was no benefit in it
500 years later,
the Surgeon General of the United States of America announced in 1979 1980, that it has been conclusively proven medically that smoking causes cancer.
This knowledge was not available 500 years before to the Ottomans.
So once Muslims now have this new information,
then one can no longer say well, smoking is more cruel, just carry on. Why? Because you know the scholars of the past that it was mcru finish. Our knowledge is different. The information we have today is not what they had.
So we now have to go back to the Sharia
and see what is the ruling in the Sharia regarding things which cause death
or cause major harm. Cancer is death or devastation, physical medical devastation.
And, of course, the rulings are very clear.
The rulings whether it be in the plan, like Dr. Seuss,
or from the Sunnah, whoever killed themselves will find himself in the Hellfire killing himself over and over again the same way, a Muslim or a Muslim and Salim and Muslim women listen to AD. A clear Muslim is one who from whom other Muslims are saved from his hand or his tongue. As person smoking they have shown that people who who get what they call secondary smoke, they're as liable to get cancer as these people are smoking themselves. Because even the smoke that this smoker takes is is filtered. What's going into other people's lungs is unfiltered.
So all of these things point to the fact that smoking is hot
today, this is the correct ruling with regards to smoking.
So this is a process now is that Islam changing? No Islam hasn't changed. Has the Sharia changed here? No, the Sharia hasn't changed the Sharia. I was used to get the ruling McGrew 500 years ago, and the Shetty eyes used to get the ruling haram today, because our knowledge has changed. This is our knowledge has changed.
And this is what provides
Islamic the Islamic legal system with a flexibility which makes it applicable to all places and times. This is a question which is commonly raised to us. How can we expect to apply
slavery, which was taught some 1400 years ago, how can it possibly be relevant to us in the 20th century, going into the 21st century
is if one were to take the laws of Britain, the Magna Carta, the laws of America, the American Constitution, and take these and try to apply it today, there are many parts of it, which human society would reject outright.
And the American Constitution, it states
that a black man is three fifths of a white man.
It says the Constitution of the United States of America,
the best brains of America put that together, something rejected
that white people are
superior to non whites.
when one looks at the legal systems from the west,
one can see, obviously, that they are not applicable today, what they've had to do is they've had to cancel the Constitution is still there. But they've cancelled all the sections, which were recognized later to be, you know, humanly incorrect, it was inhumane, or whatever, they had to cancel these sections, it's not a matter of applying it sometime here. And you know, because there can never be a time,
there can never be a time when it is acceptable to say that one group of people are by heredity, but due to the color of their skin, inferior to another group of people. That was a belief held at that time, and the Constitution was a product of that belief.
So that's why it is not applicable today. Because those laws, those legal systems, were the product of human reasoning. As such, there will be amongst it some good things, because Allah has given us some consciousness. And we have inherited, you know, over the generations, in even people, the peoples of Christian Europe, etc, through the Torah, the laws of the Torah have been inherited into their legal systems to some degree. So, to the degree that they these things, these things have been inherited, there is truth there.
So the legal systems of the past will not be totally irrelevant, but will be largely irrelevant.
Whereas Islamic law
will be applicable for all times, because the foundation the Sharia,
has been prescribed by Allah Who created human beings, and knows how human beings will change he addresses the very nature of human beings. So those laws are universal laws, which are not limited to any place or any time.
Whereas the human component,
this will be human effort to reason and to apply those laws over time and these laws which have come out of the fic. These we recognize as being changeable. We are not bound by them, where they're applicable. We utilize them where they're no longer applicable. We leave them
they're still based on shediac. So it doesn't mean that they are irrelevant in their totality, the Sharia still is relevant,
that aspect is still applicable, where similar circumstances arise. Now, having understood
distinction between fifth and shediac.
We can look briefly at how fick
From the time of the Prophet Muhammad SAW Solomon telarus.
has not evolved, because it is fixed. The Sharia is divine revelation. This is what guided prophet muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.
During the time of his prophet tour, he was guided by divine revelation.
at the same time, he did make some he had
HDX had meaning striving to come to conclusions
by way of analysis
Using deductive reasoning,
this entity had existed even in the time of the Prophet Muhammad SAW,
he made he had
as well as his companions, they also practiced.
However, the HDX had the reasonings
the deductions of the Prophet Muhammad wa sallam and his companions.
During the time of the prophet SAW his alum,
when whenever a fundamental source of Islamic law,
the fundamental source was the shediac
If revelation confirmed
the HD heart of the Prophet Mohammed Salah, then it became law.
If revelation did not confirm his he had, then it was not law.
Similarly, when his companions made he had and there were circumstances which arose in their times when they made he had.
If revelation confirmed it, it was accepted. If it didn't, it was not. So. The HD had of the Prophet Moses, Solomon, the Sahaba, were not considered independent sources of law.
In that period, revelation was the main source. This is a brief example. When we speak of entity head of the province as we know his decision concerning the prisoners. After the Battle of butter,
he asked his companions, what should we do with them, they gave different opinions, he chose one of the opinions and then Allah corrected him and said, that it was more suitable to do this,
which was one of the opinions of the Sahaba that was the to execute them.
He chose mercy
let them go
get in a ransom themselves etc. But Allah corrected that he hadn't said no, they should have been executed.
The Sahaba we know that problem was our solemn told them after the Battle of the trench cleaned up, and they want to deal with Benny Breda. The Jews who had treacherously supported the pagans of Mecca
to create a rare action against Muslims.
They were to go to bed in Croatia to tackle their fortress and punish them for what they did that the problem was asylum told the sahaabah the leading group that went ahead that they should not pray salata acid except in the vicinity of the fortress of panic
when the time for answer came on the way the Sahaba different
Some said well, problem was lots of them said don't pray salata Lhasa except in Benny forever. So that's what we're gonna do, we will not praise A lot of us and I will continue to be which manual forever
knowing that the time for salata laaser would go,
meaning they would be praying so to answer in the time of marketing,
knowing that there is no joining of, you know, Arthur and Margaret, you joined the horned owl, sir.
You cannot join it tomorrow. So if you're praying us around the time of Madrid, we are praying Tada. Outside of its time.
This was the Prophet Moses Allen's instruction.
That's the obvious meaning of that instruction. And that's what a group of the Sahaba went with. And they continued.
The other group
reflected and said, what was the intent of the Prophet Muhammad SAW Salaam here, when he said, don't pray us to accept
his intent was asked to hurry for us to hurry to get to burning forever. He didn't intend for us to pray a lot of us are outside of the time.
Allah has also said
that the Salah is written for the believers in established times.
So this provides auto answer there and then went on.
This was he had amongst the Sahaba right here.
We can see a difference in approach. Some of the Sahaba favorite taking the statements of the most I sell them as they were, don't try to get into it, to see what he meant by it, etc, etc. and just go with it. And others said, Well, we need to try to understand what was he
Attending here, you know, that there must be a reason for him to tell us to do this thing which seems to go against whatever else we have known.
This is two differences in approach.
And these two differences, you will see developing themselves, you know, through the evolution of fish till our times.
after the time of the provenance asylum in the first era, which is known as the era of establishment or the time of the righteous caliphs, which is still within the seventh century.
We find that through the practice of the Sahaba
the fifth or the principles of fic
were identified as the Quran and the Sunnah.
and they, as they were using the principle of chaos, to establish their edge, that is basically
would look to the Quran when issues arose. If they didn't find answers in the crime they would look to the sooner.
And in looking in the Quran, even if they found an answer, they would also check it The sooner because really, no one looks first at the Quran, one cannot ignore the sooner
because the sooner is revelation.
And the revelation has to be looked at in its totality.
And Allah has said in the Quran once La Liga de la la semana de la la, to reveal to you the mind of the Koran in order to clarify for the people what was revealed to them.
So there's one that cannot be separated from the crime, though you begin your research in the crime, you cannot stop there, if you find what you think is the answer, you still have to go to the center, because these two are inseparable, they cannot be separated. So they would check in the sunlight to see if there was further clarification.
And if they didn't find their answers in the quiet and the sooner, then they would gather suggest some possible solutions. And whatever they all agreed on.
This then became the law or the ruling for that time. And that was that principle of that consensus of opinion came to be known as in your mind.
But now, when they were giving their opinions, they were not giving their opinions in a fashion which was unrelated to the requirements,
there would still go back to the crime and so not to see some kind of implications. And from these implications, they were giving their opinions.
So there was a kind of deductive reasoning happening here. And that deductive reasoning
is what is referred to as chaos. So chaos was in operation there, though the biggest issue or the biggest methodology was what they refer to as h Ma, but the foundation of it was still the US people we're not, you know, coming out of the blue not related to Quran and Sunnah at all.
We could say at that time, that the madhhab or the school of thought was really the school of thought of the Calif, the Khalifa.
Whatever he decided on Finally, this is what everybody followed.
And we know there were other opinions.
Omar radiallahu anhu, different with Abu Bakar
during his khilafah, but he kept his opinion to himself abubaker made a decision concerning this. So he went ahead and did it. But when he became Calif, then he changed it.
And everybody was obliged to follow the decision that he made. So, the madhhab really was one superficially on the surface, everybody followed that of the Khalifa.
Though there were differing opinions, the differing opinions were tolerated.
People had opinions for themselves, which they kept to themselves, so they may have practiced personally, but openly, they stayed behind the opinion of hanifa.
Now, after the time of the righteous caliphs, we enter into the eighth century
known as the era of the Romanians in this period,
the practice of HDX had
began to develop rapidly,
mainly because of the fact that the omae and leadership
strayed away from the pure foundations of
the client and the sooner
they began to accept and to practice principles which were adopted from societies around them, etc. And the leadership meeting, what we're saying is that there was corruption developing in the leadership
and the time of the righteous caliphs.
The major companions of the Prophet Muhammad wa salam used to stay close to the caliphs, they will be there as a source of information for them in the making of the decisions, the Shura, the consultative body, which would be consulted when decisions have to be made. But by the time of the domains
where the leadership started to become corrupt, then the scholars left the regions of the caliphs, they started to avoid the courts of the caliphs.
Because to be there would be to be obliged to submit to corruption.
So they instead moved to outlying provinces to other towns, other parts of the oma. And where people, of course in these areas they needed to, to know the correct rulings on different issues, then they were there to to give those rulings. And a number of different centers of learning flourished
various areas of the oma
and the science of Hadeeth. The authentication of the statements of the Prophet Moses lm evolved, because of the sectarian splits which were taking place at this time, the Shia, the cottage, were splitting off. And in defense of their positions, some of their members were fabricating traditions to give support to their deviant beliefs and ideas, etc. So among the scholars, there are those like azuri, and others who began the process of collecting the authentic traditions.
And what we find here is an effort even in this period of the domains, where to some degree the ht had of the Sahaba the opinions of the Sahaba. And the generation and followed them known as a tabula one began to be compiled also.
So a compilation of Fiq began there to preserve correct rulings, because where the leadership had become corrupt, and they were deciding and taking actions which were themselves illegitimate. there needed to be for the protection of the deen in the minds of the Muslims, they needed to be efforts to compile the correct rulings outside of those circles.
So it was in this era that the initial schools of Islamic law appeared. And in that era, there were many.
I mean, we know today of the four
but in that time, there were
hundreds, literally hundreds of schools of Islamic law.
among them, there were those who appeared more outstanding than others. They were their knowledge etc, was greater their reasoning powers were stronger. So you found even in that period, that students would be shifting around studying under different scholars and starting to gravitate towards, you know, those that tended to be the more outstanding amongst them.
And in this period of time, also, the two trends of that we spoke up from the time of the Sahaba. The trend of reasoning
behind the revelation. And accepting the revelation without trying to get into the reasoning also appeared and they were given names, even from this time, the school of Medina, which was headed by Mr. Malik,
came to be known as a hadith
from that time, I know people tend to think of the name Ali Hadees today is something a new madhab which is popped up, you know, just recently a few years ago in India, Pakistan, but the reality is that this term, this approach is ancient.
The people who studied around the Mathematica tsechu are known as adenitis
Those who studied around Imam Abu hanifa. In Iraq, they were known as
the peoples of opinion.
And Imam Abu hanifa. No he was called are the people in his area were called the people of opinion. It didn't mean that they were basing every ruling and every decision just merely an opinion No.
But that they would try to find out the reasoning behind the various narrations
to be able to apply them more widely. This was their approach.
Whereas the people of Medina, their approach was that if the purpose of the laws were not defined by profit firms and sell them, if he didn't give that clarification, then we will avoid trying to get into it to their minds. Just stay with what is obvious and clear. We know we're on the safe and clear path. That was their approach. So when people would sit in the circle of Mr. Malik, and they would ask questions, you know, what if? Right, Mr. Malik would tell them, please go to Iraq, and speak with the water first,
when they were called the water first in Arabic, out of it? Right? Because they will begin their questions with our ita. What if so, and so sorry, my mic was sick over there. You want to deal with what's real? And in front of you right now, this has happened? What do we do? I can give you a ruling for this, you know, based on this idea, but what if you go to Iraq.
we had in the era of following it. So what we should note here is that in this period, as I mentioned, students of learning the scholars themselves traveled, and the sat on the various scholars, they did not limit themselves to any of the major scholars in the era following it, the era of the ambassador, this process of traveling and studying under different scholars widen even more. And you'll find for example, Mohammed Hassan a shibani. May one of the main students of level hanifa. He is amongst the narrator's of Al Motta.
Meaning he memorized Mata and its totality and he is among the major narrators.
He studied under
a mama Shafi himself was a student of Mr. Malik through his early days, until Imam Malik died.
Then he went to practice law himself. He went to Yemen. There he was accused of Shiite leanings and brought to
judgment, defended himself while he was there, he sought to study under the students of Imam Abu hanifa. So he studied under Mohammed and who studied under them and gain knowledge. And from that, he wrote a book called alpha, which became his compilation of fake rulings. Then he went
to study under Imam allays, who was a contemporary of Imam
But by the time he got to Egypt, Elisa died. Elizabeth inside so he studied under the students of families.
And he stayed there. And there he wrote a new book called al
in which he changed more than 50% of the rulings he had made in alhaja. He didn't have any problem, he changed his opinion. And he settled there in Egypt. And that became the center of the school known as the Shafi school afterwards.
And he made a statement interesting statement that Imam Elif
was a greater faqih
than Mr. Malik, and he is one who studied under both he can make that statement.
He said but my mom lives students caused his school to be lost.
marmalade had weak students. So his school was absorbed by the ram Shafi and the Shopify school is what evolved. So we don't even know that there was a lazy mishap today, people have you mentioned the lazy man's lazy method. You're making up your
mind that lazy matter
This is what the mama Shafi said, at the mama layth was a greater 40 of our home in Malik, sorry, put it a greater 40.
But in my Malik students were strong. He had strong, you know, legal experts amongst the students. So his school of law continued.
And in this period of time also,
you found that there were other great scholars, people like an outside authority, and others who, though they were great legal minds,
there were other factors which cause their schools of law to disappear. Some were political factors,
as in the case of a story, where he refused
the ambassade ruler, old man sores appointment, you know, they wanted to appoint him as a judge, he refused it, tore up the letter and threw it in the Tigris Euphrates.
And he had to go into hiding.
Because in those days, you just don't refuse the Caliph.
So, so he went into hiding means that he could not maintain students, the students only is very close to those who still hang with him, you know, go wherever he went. And then, when he was on his deathbed, he instructed his main student to erase everything that you wrote from him.
All of his rulings erased them.
Why? Because his position, as well you will find was the position of the other scholars was that their rulings were based on their time. They didn't want their rulings to become rigid, rigidly followed by others blindly without any thought processes, etc.
So he instructed his student to erase and the student erased.
So his school of law was never collected, compiled. It's only recently
some students researching in fic have compiled from the various books of the schools of Islamic law now that around when they make references to the opinions of Imam authority, so they've compiled it all together, now, you can buy a book which is called the mazahub 30
with the rulings on the various issues compiled from the other books.
Similarly, we had an asari
whose madhhab was very strong in the area of Syria,
Palestine, Lebanon, and in Spain, it was the main hub.
in the 10th century,
a Chavez scholar, by the name of Abu Zahra
who was made the judge of Damascus he offered a prize of 100. Durham's for whoever would memorize a concise book of Shafi fit.
Yeah, for the prize of 100 theorems. So the students, you know, students of learning in those days were poor, struggling. So in order to earn this money, though, they followed other Muslims, whatever they would go and memorize this concise compilation of
and of course, what happened is that after people memorized it, you know, though they're following other schools of Islamic law, this is now in their subconscious, when they start to make rulings and make decisions. This is starting to affect their decisions. So eventually, they became our face.
So the School of Design disappeared
by the 11th century in the region of Palestine, such a disappeared,
not because necessarily it was weaker, but just because of the Act basically, of that judge to make it. So what is this telling us? When we look at this right, what does it mean I make for this is history, and what does it really matter relative to us today, the significance of it is one that the four must haves that we know today.
Were not divinely ordained, meaning that problems are solved them, you know, predicted them, although some people made up traditions to imply that he did predict them.
But they remained because of a variety of factors, either there were political support for them. For example, in the Ottoman period, the Ottomans adopted the Hanafi school as their, the school of the Empire. So they enforced the Hanafi school as the legal school for practicing in the courts throughout the autumn.
In Empire, and so the Hanafi school spread.
the humblest school basically had disappeared. If it weren't for the fact that Mohammed Abdul Wahab
had studied in Iraq, and had studied under scholars from the humble method, and it was affected by me and his opinions, and he was from the humble method. So, the movement, which he the revivalist movement, which he began in Saudi Arabia, had overtones of the humble image. So the humble never came back alive. Otherwise, basically, the hammer was dead people didn't even refer to it anymore, hardly.
It was the Maliki Shafi. And kind of he was just nobody even talked about it, except for that fact. And that fact of that movement brought it back to live, it's spread, etc.
So there are political issues involved here. The math hubs
and their survival are not due to the fact that these were the greatest scholars of the oma
Shafi already said that a leaf was a greater legal scholar than Malik.
They survived because the students that were with them were good, strong students who maintained their line of reasoning, etc, etc. There are there are other factors beyond us saying that they were the greatest scholars of the room.
They were among the greatest scholars of the room is among the greatest scholars of the oma, but to say, you know, to give somebody for example, somebody the title of me awesome,
dangerous title, because who are we to make that judgment?
To say he is the greatest scholar of the oma? No, we cannot say this.
He studied under other great scholars, great scholars studied under him. Abu Youssef, and Mohammed Shivani, after the time of Abu hanifa differed with him and over 50% of his rulings.
What we know today as the Hanafi madhhab is not the rulings of Abu hanifa. Maybe a portion of it represents his rulings. But a greater proportion represents the rulings of his students who changed his rulings, disagreed with him and made other rulings in its place as their own knowledge increased, etc.
These are among the realities of the schools of Islamic law.
This was the way in which the schools developed.
And the scholars who learned the religions learned under the scholars wherever they were, they moved from one scholar to another, they studied periods of time with one they went to study. They didn't have any problem with it. Nobody was telling them. Oh, you are a Maliki student. Don't go back to Mr. Malik. You can study in our circle here. No, nobody told them this. This was never expressed. People were free to take rulings. And that's what they did. They took rulings from wherever they found it to be correct. And you will find statements of the Imams themselves, referring to the students that they should not blindly follow whatever they ruled that they should understand where
the rulings came from. And to make rulings based on the foundations.
All of the moms you can find similar statements attributed to them. And this is how Fiq evolved in that state. It was very vibrant, but with the latter part of the ambassade era, when we had a change take place,
which was fit without a reality developed in a large scale due to mainly to the court debates, because what happened was that the Abbasid caliphs, you know, in their corruption, they would have court jesters, you know, dancers, singers, a court magician, a court astrologer, and had all these things, they're in their courts, and they also had a court
scholar, they would have a scholar from the Hanafi madhhab. And one from the Shafi because these were the main two at the time. And they would
introduce, you know, for their entertainment for the entertainment, you know, philosophical entertainment, intellectual enjoyment, they would introduce legal issues, and the scholars would debate over these issues, whoever won the debate to be given a little bag of gold. Right. So you had this sense of rivalry developing because now the scholar from the chaff a man's hub, he wouldn't want to lose. You know, the issue of this debate was not let's we're going to find the truth, but I want to win the argument.
By any means necessary, and this is when Greek logic and all this became prevalent in the arguments, you know, Sunil developed on the basis of Greek logic, you know, Greek logic where, you know, right can be wrong and wrong can be right, everything is relevant, you know, this kind of reasoning. So you will find people will be, they wouldn't want to give up their arguments, you know, they would just go down with it, you know, because to lose the argument is to lose for your school. And, you know, so you find people clinging on in this way,
a sense of fanaticism started to develop at that time.
And at the same time, also, of course, you can imagine this court debates, you know, after talking about real and possible things, you run out, you run out of real and possible things to talk about. So then what do you do you go to the hypothetical, the things which don't exist and likely cannot exist. So, you found issues being raised now, which are totally ludicrous, totally ludicrous, which unfortunately remain in the books of FIFA even tonight time. So you can find in fifth books, for example, traffic books coming out of that period, which is still around people read it. scholars in our discussing the issue, if a person passed wind into a bag,
and close the back, passing windbreaks
to pass wind.
So if you pass those wind into a bag, and close the bag, and carried it with you at a later point you made your will do again and then you open the bag and the wind came out is your window broken?
This is ludicrous.
Anybody who is going to pass with the bag and carry it around, we should take them to the hospital. We don't need to debate whether it's broken or not, you know something wrong with his head.
similarly, you can find in the books of Hanafi Fiqh, and I ran into it in Singapore. There is a book there, which was translated by somebody from India, he translated into English, a book, a basic book, which they were distributing for Islam, basic understanding of Islam. And in it,
I found in the area is the area of Voodoo,
the man is putting the things which break wood.
Among them, he puts
having sex with a fish.
I told the brothers, they're in Singapore, see, brothers, please destroy this book. Don't put this in circulation. If any non Muslim saw this, what Muslims debate about whether, you know whether you have to do if you have sex with a fish, I think you're mad. But this was something which came out of that period of time.
And unfortunately, some of those things I said has remained in books and sometimes people translating these books of the past directly, they bring this into the present. And it makes really, Muslims look quite ludicrous. Now, the realities of the differences of opinions amongst the scholars, because having understood that there were differences, we see this trend towards this fanatical attitude towards the schools of Islamic law. We say this is an abnormal trend. It wasn't normal. This was not the way of the early scholars. This trend of fanaticism, you know, went to a point where I'm sure you're familiar with rulings which were made, which prohibited people from
transferring from one method to another.
After the fall of Baghdad,
some scholars decided at that time they were gonna close the door which they had no more he had finished. I said all he had was already done for us no more no need. And a rigidity really hard attitude developed so much so that over some differences, simple differences in rulings. Hanafi scholars ruled that it was not permissible for a hanafy to marry a Shafi.
It reached that point. It reached the point where they couldn't pray behind each other. So you had mosques, which were built in Damascus and Iraq, etc. In that period of time, they had two men, Arabs, one for the Hanafi, one for the Sharpies.
When honey bees finished their prayer, then the chef is going to make the prayer.
To this day, you can go to Sierra, of course they're not doing it anymore, but you can still go and see those mosques from that period of time. And the Kaaba,
around the Kaaba. There were prayer, what they call Malcolm, Malcolm X, Malcolm Hanafi, for the HANA fees. For those who when the time for prayer came those who are Hana fees in making the traffic come line up behind the other female MCs when he was finished, then they the shots rays would go to macom Shafi, you know, you had these four structures around the Kaaba, one for each of the different schools of Islamic law.
So you had four different salons taking place around the Gaza.
I mean, this is how deep that funnel
Of course, this is not true Islam at all, this is against the spirit of the scholars of the past etc, you know completely
and hamdulillah you know since that time of course into our times this attitude of fanaticism has settled down somewhat where people are now more willing to accept but you know the simmering of it still remain till it
you know till it you will find people depending how fanatical they are, you know, they'll
they wipe on your socks
or some Sharpies
and a physical physically touch a woman you they still gonna leave you for now. We can't pray behind them they're praying without will do. Yeah. So these kind of attitudes still remain till today. And one of the common examples of it I've seen in many places where people from the Indian subcontinent and have gone is that there will be two times for prayer, for Salah to Lhasa in masters in Hong Kong, in Sri Lanka, in these places, there'll be two times for Salatu Lhasa till today. So you'll have if they have shopping and how to feed jamaats you'll have two different jamaats.
Of course, this is a leftover from that era of fanaticism. Now, when we go back and look at the differences which existed amongst the scholars of the past, we have to come to some understanding as to why they're different. If they all were basing their rulings on the Quran and the Sunnah, then why were they different? The realities is one, that the Arabic language itself had different implications.
Some words had dual meanings. So scholars would take different interpretations on the meanings. And you had also
words which had both figurative and
actual meanings, you know, some words may have dual means the difference between having a dual meaning like the word poorer, which means the menses of the woman, as well as the period of purity between men says this is two distinctly different meanings. They can't be one or the other. Whereas you had some other words like lumps, Lamas tomb, which comes in the surah. Concerning touching a woman
lamps, this idea of touching, it had two implications. One touching, literally touching, and the other one, which meant sexual relations. It was a, a metaphorical way of referring to sexual relations. So some scholars went through the metaphorical meanings, some went with the literal meanings. You also had grammatical differences in words having different grammatical implications, which would lead to different conclusions. And then, a big area of difference was that of the Hadith narrations, the Hadees were collected after the time of the great scholars, the great scholars of law were in the eighth century, earliest century, the collections were in the late eighth century,
ninth century, this is when the collections of Hadeeth took place major collections. So what you found then is that there were many early scholars who were not aware, they made rulings based on what Hadees was available to them. And naturally, their rulings would differ from those who found
some had different conditions in terms of why they accept when they would accept the Hadith, for example, in Iraq, because there was a lot of the fabrication of Hades took place in Iraq. So the scholars of Iraq were very, very particular. They wouldn't accept Hades which which had single chains of narrations they would only accept if it had a number of chains what they call the heads which was much worse. You know, if it was a, an issue, which went against an obvious text of the Quran with some other principle which is already established, they would not accept any change in that principle, unless the narration which was brought to them was mature with a number of having a
number of narrations. So this is a condition they said.
Other scholars favorite for example, the Sunnah of the people of Medina, where they call Mr. Medina over had these narrations because they felt that this actions that was done by the people of Medina, they were the descendants from the time of prophets, I send them that what was done what was common in Medina was carried on by them so this was a sort of unnatural way in which the Sunnah, was carried on. So they would give precedence to it over Hadith narrations, you know, where it was the hardest narration may not be supported by a number of other evidences, but a single man had his narration, which seemed to go against the practice of the people of Medina, they will favor the
practice of the people of Medina.
But they also had principle of chaos. This is where the biggest differences arose. Because the principle of chaos now you're dealing with few
And scholars had different ways different approaches to reasoning,
some developed principles which were acceptable
by some or not by others. So you had different principles, which evolved reasoning principles of
Islam is this harbor law. So these are different principles developed in different schools, there was a similarity there were aspects of chaos, really, there were aspects of chaos or reasoning around the US, but they employed slightly different approaches.
Some scholars rejected my liking my my friend, for example, he rejected me claims in July is a liar. That was his opinion from the time of the Sahaba. Okay, but go beyond that time, there was always scholars with different
so to try to claim, in your mind make a principal individuality said no, no, it wouldn't go with that. He said, I would prefer to follow a diet Fridays, away caddies meant to go to the gym and the claim of each month.
So these were differences in approach. So these differences lead to a difference in rulings.
So what is their situation?
They made their HD had problems as elements said, that whoever makes it sad manage data, file Saba follow, whoever makes it to the head and is correct gets to reward.
And whoever makes it to the head is wrong, they get one reward. So for them, how they made their efforts they rewarded for their effort. But for us today, what is our responsibility? Our responsibility is to try to go with as best as we can, what is correct.
This is our responsibility. If in the area that we are the scholars or Hanafi scholars who study under them,
we are in essence, we could say we are from the Hanafi school based on that.
scholars who studied under and there's nothing wrong with it, in that the scholars of the Hanafi School of Islamic law strove to apply the Quran and Sunnah in the various regions that they were.
And the efforts that they made cannot be denied. We have to recognize them, we have to utilize them where they're applicable. But if we find some ruling, which doesn't seem applicable, and in another school, we find a ruling more applicable, then we shouldn't hesitate to take that ruling.
Because it is he had of human beings and they committed errors.
Their errors are forgiven because they were making it so we cannot blame them for theirs. But if we realize that there was an error here, because this wasn't available or whatever, then it is wrong for us to blindly follow just saying because we are Hennessy's then we're just going to follow it. We just ignore this other one. No, this is not correct. When Mr. Malik was asked by his students, if a person follow this a hobby in everything that is a hobby did, would he be in the correct path? Would he be on the correct path? Ma'am Malik's answer was no
unless that Sahabi was correct. Because the truth is one
meaning he is saying that you cannot blindly follow as a hobby. So as he was saying it's not correct to blindly follow so hobby. Can we then today say we're going to blindly follow anyone? No.
The only one who was protected from error was rasulillah.
He was protected from error. He is the one that we can follow blindly.
Anyone else? We have to weigh their rulings their opinions based on the Quran and the Sunnah.
This is the correct methodology in dealing with the issues of the schools and Islamic law. Today we have to be tolerant
if a person chooses not to follow a method, but to study under whoever is available without identifying saying that I am a NFU, I am a Shafi whatever he chooses not to do this is right. No one should be coming and saying to him, You are deviant
you're a mommy shape on
you know if you don't have any mom of the four then you're a mommy shape on.
This is not right. This is not right. What about the many scholars of the past who are not students of these foreign moms? What are we gonna say? their moms
At the same time, if a person
chooses to follow one of the schools of Islamic law. This is the area that they're going to study. And this is the scholars that are available to them. This is what they prefer to study. Again, no one should come and tell them. This is deviation. You cannot follow a school of Islamic law. No, you have to be free of any schools. No, this isn't correct, either.
If they wish to do that, this is their option. They're following the scholars, because even the person who says I'm not following any of the schools, they're following scholars.
They're gonna follow scholars because none of us has the ability to go back to the sources and extract all the laws right back from zero again, none of us knowledge of the Quran and the Sunnah to the degree to do that, no, we're going to depend on scholars.
The scholars are from Allah, Hadith, or known leading scholars like chef monster, whatever, they're still following. And the point is, if they start to take the kind of position that if chef monster didn't said this, then that's it finish. I don't want to hear you either. No, no, I don't want to hear any other chef monster selfish. This alley had this caller, he said it finished. That's the end of argument, then you've become a blind follower. no different from the others that we spoke about who are blindly and fanatically
we have to maintain an open mind.
Blind following for us is prohibited. Of course, in practice, we will follow the rulings of the scholar who is we trust in our area, whatever we're following him, he says this. You know, if we asked him for the evidence, he experienced too complicated for us to understand then what
you trust him, you know, he's not the corrupt individually seems to be a righteous man, etc. You trust him? Based on your trust of him, you follow him? So in practice, it's a kind of blind following there, isn't it in practice, though, but your mind is not in the mindset of blind following meaning that if another scholar comes to visit, and he explains this particular issue in a different way, that you don't say, Oh, no, no, I don't hear.
My scholar already told me this. No, you keep your mind open, hear what he has to say if he brings evidence, and so and so. And then in the end, you see, this seems to be more correct, than what is on you now.
To follow that one. If this one seems after the explanation says to be more correct, then that's what you are obliged to follow? What appears This is your own, he had what appears to you to be the most correct.
Not according to your desire, not necessarily what is most pleasing to your desires, but what appears to be the most correct based on the fact that so until he brings some evidence here, it's Quran, he brought add Botswana? Well, the other one is just giving an opinion.
You know, he had maybe brought them from the crowd, but nobody's. So you can see there's a quantitative difference here. Okay, so this one appears to be more correct, than that's the one you go with.
Because even in any of the given schools, you will find also differences of opinion. In the Hanafi school, you will find a difference of opinion, you can find Hanafi scholars, whose position was that with every movement in Salah you should raise your hands
Hanafi scholars, we held that position. They were not the majority, but they were among the Hanafi scholars. So the point is here, in the end, we have to keep that kind of openness, where we try to follow the deen to the best of our ability based on the best of our knowledge. This is what the law will hold us accountable for. And this requires, as I said in the beginning, tolerance, tolerance of difference of opinions, that there are people will hold different opinions. And if their opinions are based on evidence, etc, then we have to respect their right to hold those different opinions.
If it's just based on desire, then we have a right to thermolysis is not correct rather,
you know, if you're going to take a position it should be based on some kind of evidence we have Quran and Sunnah. This is our religion. It's not just opinion, without foundation.
So in summing up
this massive topic, which I've just
the position that the Muslim should take with regards to the schools of Islamic law is that they are the efforts of the great scholars of the past.
Down to the present
They made tremendous efforts to implement the Sharia. For us, they made rulings.
are obliged to respect them because wherever a person doesn't respect the scholars Professor Sallam said, Whoever doesn't respect the scholars is not of us.
We are obliged to respect them, we should not speak disparagingly against them.
If they made mistakes, they were human beings. Everybody makes mistakes as the Prophet said, khulumani Adam hapa all of Adam's descendants make mistakes.
So we look at them as human beings, great scholars of the past who made this effort handed it down to us, it is our responsibility to take benefit from it, not to reject it.
But if a person chooses to focus on one school, as the main main area from which he studies that is right to do so, if he chooses not to, that is also his right to do so.
And if we are able to disseminate this kind of approach, then inshallah we'll be able to remove some of the differences, some of the bad feelings which exist amongst the Muslims, merely over this madhhab fanaticism.
Dr. Bilal for this informative talk on evolution of faith.
Now we begin the question and answer session. Please pose your questions limited to the topic only.
For the brothers in the
multipurpose room library and the reception area.
We'll have one question from that side, one from the auditorium and one from the ladies side. Alternatively,
we begin the first question from the ladies side.
Students of Abu hanifa have changed his rulings, original rulings. The question was, if students of Abu hanifa changed his rulings, where are the original rulings, these original rulings are recorded in the books.
Because when Abu Yusuf Mohammed Shivani zophar change their rulings, they would mention Abu hanifa was of this opinion, but we are of this opinion, based on this hadith or this line of reasoning or whatever.
So the original rulings of Abu hanifa are recorded in the early books till today.
I mean, among the clear ruling some people if they hear this, they say what
hanifa was of the opinion that if you drank substances, which would be intoxicating in large amounts, as long as the quantity of drinking, it is not intoxicating, it was permissible.
That was his position.
Meaning if you took a glass of beer, right? And you only took, you know, a small amount, a very small amount, it's not enough to intoxicate you,
then it was permissible.
I wouldn't say beer but beer like substances, I mean things which are clearly alcohol, okay, there was no difference about it, but substances which were in the early stages of fermentation, which meant if you drank enough of it, you could get intoxicated from it, but small amounts of it would normally not intoxicate you. So, he took that position, this is referred to they call it naive, he took the position that it was permissible, but his students Mohammed and will use have rejected that position. They went to the Hadith masskara kathira, who for
whatever intoxicates in large amounts, small amounts of it is forbidden.
Can we have the next question from the brothers in the auditorium
can elimine make a statement and if he has to make a statement, what he can do?
question Can a layman make he had? I don't know about lemon, you know, as we say a person who is not a scholar because layman sounds like you know you have the priests and the layman you know this is the Christian traditions right? A kind of person who is not a scholar or a major student of learning make he had a brother we make he had from the time you get up in the morning till the time you go to sleep at night. You make HD and you're gonna be making decisions based on information that you have circumstances arise in your life, which you don't know they are
If you think back well, what should I do here and you make a decision, I think it's this way, this is your edge.
We tried to find out as much as you can based on what you learned earlier. So this is your HD hat. So there are different levels of HD hat, right? each and every person is going to do some HD hat in his his or her lifetime, no matter how ignorant he may be. The point is, for a person to make HD hide in terms of rulings for people's, you know, this is what you're talking about. This is not what becomes problematic if you have no knowledge.
And you make it too hard for people. This is a sin of Hamza Sallam said,
two judges are in the Hellfire and one in paradise. Two judges are in the Hellfire and one in paradise. The judge who knows the correct ruling, but rules against it is going to help. The judge who makes a ruling without knowledge is going to hell. And the one who goes to Paradise is the one who makes this ruling based on knowledge.
This is the principle by which we say the HD height of the ignorant is unacceptable it's sinful. He had many it's too hard for people that's why referred to him as a judge meaning his judging between people making a ruling which people are going to follow. But for you on an individual level, what do you do? You make your own personal itch that
maybe you have the next question from the library?
This is a very basic question which I want to ask I have got non Muslim friends also, I mean, friends who have converted to Islam, because a lot of confusion in their minds. It is that why do we have to name ourselves like Allah DS or Salafi or many all of this thing when it is, I mean, not directly through through Quran and Hadith. In fact, there are verses which says was some common muslimeen. And
God has referred to us with these names.
I mean, it is it's it's really creating a lot of problem and confusion. Please clarify sorry, if I'm hurting somebody or god forbid me if I'm wrong, thank you
idea of labeling oneself
whether it is Hadji
because we don't even have to go all the way to Hanafi whatever, even the Haji his idea of Hajji You know, it is something which is not from Islam.
you know, yes, the person made Hydra, but to take it as a title now, where you identify yourself hajizade, you know,
islamically, it is creating this whole issue of person making hard, you know, they have a special status now in the society. And perhaps there are people who never made Hajj, who are closer to a lot and this person may have received more reward for their intention to want to make Hajj than the person who went and made Hajj.
So we cannot make these kind of judgments, put these kind of labels.
But if we take it down to the level of
Hanafi, or shall phase one, so these terms were used in Arabic, initially, just to identify the school under which the person studied. Later on, when it became a fanatical kind of attitude, then people took it as a title. So people, you'll see the books written in that period, that people were called, you know, so and so hanafy and then they would identify the School of philosophy that he followed, you know, ashati, or in the Sufi school that he followed, also, you know, shazzy Lee, you know, whatever they all these names would be put off, for example, identify this individual. But of course, this is really not from Islam. It's really not from Islam, to the degree it is used to
identify the person's line of reasoning or line of thought or study or whatever, no harm in that sense, but for people now to take it as a label to define themselves, saying when they ask you what are you instead of saying I'm a Muslim, they say I'm a hanafy.
No, of course Islamic Lee, this is not good. You know, this is not good. Even to say for example, you know, I'm a selfie.
Instead of saying I'm a Muslim is I'm a selfie. these terminologies they only represent, you know, schools of thought, to try to identify schools of thought, new lines of reasoning principles, to identify oneself by them. Instead of identifying oneself by Islam. This is error. And it does, in fact, breed divisions in the oma.
Where it was necessary, titling became necessary to distinguish for example, between the Shia and Alison ojama mean because she our
calling themselves Muslim, you know, so in order to distinguish themselves then this title was used, we can see or the term Sunni Muslim, evolved, you know, really that was people falling into a trap. Because once you said Sunni Muslim, then it means also there's suddenly Muslim and she a Muslim. But in fact, there's only Muslim.
There is really only Muslim.
And the issue concerning the sooner those who follow the Sunnah and those who are Shia, this issue has to be analyzed in a systematic systematically according to quantum Suna, in fact to say is it in fact, are the sheer In fact, really, Muslims are not
is because Muslim is one Muslim.
If a president says, You know, I make my declaration of faith general and love, Sula, I make my hajra do all these other things, but I believe there's another prophet named Ghulam Ahmed.
He, as far as he said, the other things Yes, he was Muslim. I was he said, but I believe in this other prophet Ghulam Ahmed, then that nullified all of the other things that Islam was just nullified by that statement.
Similarly, where we're dealing with fundamental issues of the deen
where people begin to worship other than a law and make it a part of their Deen, then we have to say, this is no longer a part of Islam anymore. These are people who have stepped outside of the bounds of Islam.
Because there isn't just Muslim.
Maybe you have the next question from the sisters, or brothers. My question is that some people take advantage of the schools of thoughts like whichever is the easier way out. They follow that and they follow both schools of thoughts, but they take the easier way out. Is that okay? Is it I mean, wrong?
Probably Prophet Muhammad SAW Selim.
Whenever he was presented with two things which were highlighted, what did he do? He chose the easier one.
Okay. So from that point of view, if we have
two rulings, right. Now, both of these because we're talking about HD had now we're not talking about areas not of HD had where it's a question of evidence problems, as Alan said, so and so. And so there's a clear issue here that either you do it or you don't do it, we're talking about an area of HDI where the scholars have made it pretty hard on an issue.
If you apply the HDI out of one school, it will make your life difficult, very difficult.
But another school, using their HDI did make something which is practical, it's applicable in your circumstance.
Then, for you to choose, what is most applicable is perfectly legitimate.
lm said yes, you will have to assume make things easy, don't make it difficult. Do you serve the religion is easy. See from this point of view when you're dealing with areas of interest he had, but when you're dealing with areas of Quranic texts, where one school is standing behind one opinion is standing behind a clear Quranic text and Hadees fully supported and the other school has an opinion which doesn't have that. And now you are choosing the other opinion Why? Because it's easier here now. But you know, in your heart, really that one is correct. This is when you're in error.
So to follow what is easier when you know that what is easier is not more correct. This is when you're in error. But if you're following what is easier, more practical to your circumstance, when you're dealing with an issue of HD hardware, both of these are legitimate arguments, then you are following the Sunnah of the Prophet masala
is that clear?
The next question from the brothers in the auditorium.
As long as
this school of thought according to you is close to prophets, Allah sermons companions,
which school of thought is closest to problems as element is companions? I would not try to claim any school of thought discourses in some schools, they're closer in some issues and their father and others and all of the schools there are areas where they were farther than others. So, I would not attempt to claim you know, and again once you fall into that bag, you fall into the mommy Azzam bag
So I would just say that kind of arguments is better to stay away from because you see what you what are you trying to say here? You know, if in fact you, you bring in evidence, you know, you bring your support to say, well, this school is really closest to what do you think everybody should be in this school you all in the other schools get out, come on, you're wrong. You've come in this one here. So then we've turned into partisanship again. You know, it's better. We know that the deal is not complete in any one of these schools. It is in the totality of that effort, where the dean is complete for us.
We can have the next question from the sister side.
Assalamu alaikum brother,
one of my dear friend, when she was offering Salah, I observed that she did not fold her hands, while the other friend who was following me ladies, she hold her like so tight as if there was no capital. And I asked for the clarification, she said that shaytan takes the place. And men also stand in that way. Well, there are different ways of offering Salah when I went in Saudi there, I was been corrected by many, many ladies as to which posture I should adopt, I don't know, the posture that they told me was so difficult that I was very conscious about my posture, then offering Salah, like the Left, Right leg should be on the left leg and site should be a concave life. So I
didn't understand what's the right way Please clear the concept of offering sell, especially for the ladies. Okay.
First thing to know that because two issues have been raised here, one about the sheer not clasping their hands on their chest or whatever. That is from their school of thought You can also find it amongst the Maliki school. You know that portion of the Maliki. People in the Maliki school also pray with their hands to their sides. So I mean, this is a another issue.
The evidence from the Sunnah
indicates that the Prophet Moses alum clasped his hands. In fact, Mr. Malik, in his watertight self described the placing of the right hand on the left. So though it may be, you know, found in the school, among some of the followers that they painted the hands into the sides, the majority or the abundance of evidence points to other than that this is in fact not correct. In terms of the prayer of the woman.
And I know when I first learning about the deen, I announced to my family that I was a hanafy I was taught a special salon for the women. Right? And you know, there's a salon for women, and that's a lot for men. Now, this salon for women, if one looks at what is being done in the salon, one finds that it consistently goes against the clear commandments of the Prophet Mohammed says
it is done
not on the basis of Hadith of the Prophet SAW Selim but it's done on reasoning this Salah was created on reasoning
that the woman being our, we have to do things so that you will not expose yourself as much as possible.
This is the line of reasoning behind so they said when you put clasp your hands they should under chest to cover the area of the bosom. In fact is this this was for women, this one is for men. But the point is problems are seldom. He did both. He didn't specify one for women, one for men. So the placing of the hands on the chest This is from the sooner authentic sooner describes him as doing this. the raising of the hand. Actually this is what for the woman that told her don't put your hand up you know, this is no, keep your hand down here, but SLM did this also didn't specify for women and in the bowing, when going into record. They reason that if a woman bows in record, you know 45
degrees, it means that her posterior will be visible. So better she just bows the Justice partway and touches her hands on her knees don't bow completely, but problem so Selim said that the man who prayed it's a lie without making proper bowing he told him to go and pray again because you didn't bring
this form of bowing is not acceptable. Unless there's something wrong with your back, you know, your back you're crippled or something, you've got back problems then Okay, it's allowed for you. Otherwise, if your back is okay, then you're supposed to bow 45 degrees so that if you put water in your back, it's not gonna fall to the front or the back 45 degrees going into sujood. Again, the reason if the woman goes into sujood her behind is up in the air.
So she should
crumple down and put her chest on Earth, thighs, elbows on the ground and huddle herself into this little ball. So nothing of her is visible really, but just this little hump.
he frustrated with his head behind the wives, and the women of his time prayed in the same way. And he said, You should not put your chest on your thighs. He said, You should not put your elbows on the ground like a dog.
This mode of prayer is in contradiction to the actual instructions of the problem was when he said so Look Mr. iTunes to solve the prayers. You saw me pray.
He was instructing the oma. He didn't say men prayers. You see me pray, women, you have this other prayer. And if you go back to the early scholars, Abu hanifa, will yourself and the others, they were not teaching this prayer. This is something which came up later on in the especially in the Indian subcontinent from the Ottoman period onwards. It's just not in the early scholars teaching this.
So the prayer of the woman is, in fact no different from the prayer of the man.
And that prayer can be found in the authentic Hadees, where there's a compiler ation, known as the prayer of the Prophet by Nasir banni, in which is available here at the bookstore is distributed. This identifies the method of prayer based on the authentic Hadees. My advice would be for you to take that to follow it. Because, as far as I've seen, it is one of the best collections of Hadith describing the prayer.
And as I said, the wives of the Prophet, the women, in the time of the prophet SAW its alum, were known to pray, as the men prayed, there was no distinction.
The other thing I should just mention is that
the issue of when standing, whether feet should be together, our feet should be touching the people next to you. Now, when you go back to holidays, we'll find that there are references that the Sahaba when they stood, their feet are touching each other ankle to ankle, etc. Now, some people will go to extremes to try to establish this right, where you twist your feet outwards, you know, you're standing, you can feel your knees aching, you're trying to make ankles, if your foot, just so have people's feet are made in different ways, okay? So if it is reasonable uncomfortable for you to put your foot next to the other and your ankle touch is fine. But it's not required of you in the DEA
not to twist your foot to the point where as the sister said, you're more concerned with your foot than your prayer, you know. So, we should also recognize moderation in trying to follow the instructions. Also, if your foot will not bend in a particular way you do the closest thing that you can to it. But again, you know, you're held accountable only to what you could have done and you didn't do you know what you are unable to do based on physical etc, then you're not held accountable.
Maybe you have the next question from the auditorium.
now that we have the knowledge of all the four major muscles, is it now possible or needed to in unifying all the four muscles by taking the right rulings from all of them?
The issue of unification of the mud hubs, if Muslims are unable to unify themselves,
then to talk about unification of the month ABS is you know, something not really practical. The Muslim home is so divided etc today that practically speaking, yes, there is an effort towards unification amongst many of the scholars meeting in Mecca, yearly, you know, jointly making rulings, you know, so there is a body of work, which has now been compiled and has been for the past 1015 years, where scholars from all the different schools are meeting it is much more in Macau where they meet and they different scholars do researches on different issues, they make presentations, they discuss it argued and then they put out their rulings, you know, so this kind of effort is a new
effort, you know, we can say perhaps in the future it will develop a more unified approach. But the reality is that
when there were many schools of thought in the early days,
it was not in and of itself harmful.
Because there was a central leadership that was Islamic, and they were applying the principles based on what was most correct in the view of the leadership.
But when you have no correct leadership
Then to try to dream of unification it's a, as I say, an impossible dream. It's not really practical with the unification of the oma and Shao Lai when the mighty comes
when we have one leader, I mean if it happens before, Mashallah, but I mean, we know for sure it will happen in the time of the Mahdi, when he will become the leader and his mind that will be the mass of everybody was for that matter, there will be differing opinions, even then,
the thing of removing differing opinions, we can never do this. In areas in which to hide people will always have differing opinions, but the issue is that we have to be able to respect the differences. And when we have leadership, we follow that leadership.
Do we have a question from the brothers in the library?
slalom. My question is that in your talk Just now you said that you would not like to claim any school of thought to be nearer to the Quran and the Sunnah, which is the nearest to the Quran and Sunnah. And that all these schools in all the schools, some schools are farther, and some are nearer to the Quran and Sunnah. So do you know of any ruling in the School of alien Hadees? Which is wrong or which is further or which is away from the Quran and the Sunnah?
when the person raised the question of schools of thought, we're talking about what I understood from it were, quote unquote, the traditional schools of thought.
Now, the issue of ID IDs, for me to make a judgement would require me to study if it is to be looked at as a madhhab, separate motherboard together, you know, which has developed its own line of fit, etc, etc, etc, then I would have to go and look at it in that way. Because when we talk about Allah Hadith, today, it represents a must have been India, and in Pakistan, but if we go over the rest of the Muslim world, it doesn't exist, it didn't exist as a must have, per se, was scholars of this madhhab. Carrying on this is something I made, it was a way of thinking, which existed within the existing model, that there were school people study on the different scholars, but they inclined
towards Hades. So they were known as the people of Hades, even from the ancient times of Malik. Okay, so the issue of early Hades now being a Muslim, I would refrain from making this kind of a judgment. Why, because
having not gone through and looked at the books, if you bring me a series of fifth books of the early Hades, their fifth books, you know, with all their rulings, and so on, so for me to go through and analyze it, and look and judge the rulings. And so then after that kind of a process, if you want me to find where they've gone wrong, believe me, brother, if you think that they didn't make any mistakes, then you are an error.
If you think that the group or the movement known as Alia, did today in India, that they didn't make any mistakes, then you are in error, because for sure, any effort which we make as human beings have errors, so without even having to go to the books, there are areas, right.
But I would say that the frame of mind,
of Allah Hadith is a frame of mind, which is close to the way of the early generations of Muslim scholars the frame of mind not necessarily saying they might have make a distinction between the two, because a person may be following, you know, in terms of his fifth etc, is a Maliki, but his frame of mind is the Hadith.
Right, but I did point out even from the early stages, that Abu hanifa and those who studied in this area who are students coming from the live in Missouri than others, I mean, they're leaning towards opinions or the recall earlier IE, we cannot look at them as being deviant because they were following the opinion held by certain Sahaba also, this was a trend amongst a body of the Sahaba. So we go back and we say which group is closest to the sun now, the group which decided to pray in Banyan Kaurava are the one who decided to pray on the way we run into problem problems are seldom okayed both.
He okayed both.
So both trends, the trend which focuses on the Hadith,
and the rulings of the holidays, staying away from a lot of opinionated rulings or seeking the reasons behind the rulings, but strictly stick to the Hadith more closely.
This was a trend from the time of the Sahaba. And the other trend were people working out rulings trying to find the reasons behind them what they call the lol behind the laws, that this was a trend amongst the Sahaba also, which was approved by Prophet Mohammed wa sallam. So it becomes very dangerous. When one group now tries to promote itself as being the closest becomes problematic.
It is a frame of mind. You know, I prefer myself to look at it as a frame of mind a frame of mind, which is that we follow Islam as given to us in the Quran and the Sunnah, as understood by the Sahaba and the early generations of righteous scholars and Muslims. This is correct, in my view, frame of mind, whatever school that one follows that this frame of mind should be the guiding frame behind it.
Maybe have the next question from the sisters side.