Owais Fasih Siddiqui – Discussing Fiqh, & Madhab Differences
AI: Summary ©
The speakers discuss the use of the title of the Bible and Sun wak in establishing a title and the importance of proving the connection between multiple narrators. They emphasize the importance of understanding the rules and following a method to determine the best approach. The use of multiple interpretations and the importance of proving the truth of the people they are following is key for understanding the accuracy of the title. The discussion of the opinion of the community is key for finding the right teachers and finding the right teachers.
AI: Summary ©
Imam
well, Mufti. Right? Yeah. Mufti, welcome to Euricom
Masjid.
A lot of times in social media, people
often they they have, like, you know, social
media influencers
or people they follow,
or, like, when they have questions about relating
to the dean, they just look up things
on on Google
and
like, Islam q and a and stuff like
that when they don't know how what the
rulings are regarding a certain situation,
and what are the appropriate steps,
one should take when it comes to specific
rulings and asking questions.
Alright.
Before we get to the subject, I wanna
ask you, what is the difference between a
Mufti, an imam, and a sheikh?
Okay. So
throughout in our in our context, when we
say Mufti, it's it refers to someone who
studied fiqh in more depth. So that is
what a mufti.
And in the Ottoman Empire, it would refer
to someone that would issue verdicts. In our
context, it refers to someone who has studied
fiqh in more detail and is able to
create the convey the correct,
the ruling which has been already given by
the classical scholars.
So
you being a Mufti then, what what is
fiqh? So fiqh is in simple words, is
tashara, is a commentary, is the explanation
of the Quran and Sunnah.
From Muslim,
Islam is to
obey Allah and his Messenger alone. And in
fact, even the loyalty that we have to
the Messenger of Allah
is only because it's
a part of the loyalty we have to
Allah
Allah says, 'Abi Allah
and His Messenger.'
So when it comes to
how are fiqh rulings derived, the two main
sources that we have for fiqh rulings is
the Quran and the Sunnah. These are the
primary sources.
And then you have 2 secondary sources. The
secondary source for fiqh is the Ijma'a, the
consensus.
The consensus of the Sahaba
and the consensus of the other ulema that
came after.
And you have payas. This
doing analogy.
This analogical reasoning. For ex for example, if
the Quran is mentioning
that hamar is impermissible.
Now do other what ruling do other intoxicants
have? That's not mentioned in the Quran or
the Sunnah. So Qiyas would be to apply
a ruling that's in the Quran or Sunnah
and extend it to something else. So these
are the four main sources the 2 primary
being the Quran and the Sunnah And then
you have the Ijima, the consensus of the
Sahab and those ulema that came after in
every generation,
and Qiyas. This analogical reasoning, these are the
sources of Islamic law.
So since you said,
it goes back you know, it starts from
Allah, then the Messenger, and then you have
the,
Sahaba
and the ulama afterwards and stuff like that.
Does that include people, today? Can people from
today kinda just
come up with, like rulings and have their
own kind of,
like,
jurisprudence?
So one very important point is that scholars,
they're not
giving a new ruling.
Right? What they are doing is they're
interpreting
the
rulings
interpreting the Quran and the Sunnah.
So they're not lawmakers.
Right? They're kinda like the judges.
Right? The judge is not making new law.
That's something that's already that's done by the
elected officials.
They're just implementing
or conveying the correct
they're conveying the correct message. Right? They're conveying
they're applying the, the laws to the and
conveying that. So that's the job of the
ulama.
They're not lawmakers. Rather, they're conveying and interpreting,
giving the correct understanding of the Quran and
Sunnah.
Alright. So
just to for my understanding, a mufti would
be somebody who studies
the laws regarding, you know, laws of Islam
and, how we should basically
judge between ourselves and how we should,
handle each situation based on the Quran and
the sunnah that's been passed down from,
the prophet and the Sahaba.
Yeah.
But generally
it's not you don't have to be a
Mufti to understand Fiqh. Right? Fiqh is something
that was taught traditionally
at a at a very beginning elementary age
2. Right? And your elementary studies Fiqh was
taught and people had an understanding of what
the madhayib were and what fiqh is.
And
this is very important to understand that again
fiqh is not someone is making new laws.
It's rather giving the correct interpretation.
Right scholars are not lawmakers they're just interpreting
the law and there's a need
for scholars why Allah
himself makes a distinction between the learned and
the non learned amongst the Sahaba
you have those that were learned
such as the Fulfillifah Rasheedin
and then the 3 'Abdulillah,
Masood Abdullah bin Abbas, and Abdullah bin Namr
and
Mu'ad bin Jabal Aisha
So amongst the Sahaba, you had those which
were known for their fiqh and their knowledge.
And the other Sahaba, they would go to
them and ask them questions when they had.
So this distinction,
it was from the time of the messenger
between the learned and the non learned.
So, a lot of times when you hear
a you also hear the word like.
So
usually
now the 4 most prominent ones that we
all know about,
but a lot of times sometimes people are
get confused. Like, what what is a mudhubs?
Yeah. So a mudhubs,
again, it's
there are certain
it's the it's a certain methodology
methodology that they are following to arrive at
a certain conclusion.
So for example
and for example, according to one Madhub,
they will accept this hadith based because it
fulfills a certain unwanted conditions. These conditions that
they have in another mother might not accept
that hadith. So based on that, there's gonna
be an impact in fiqh.
So when we think about Madahi,
and we think about another word which is
commonly used is taqleed. Have you heard that
word before? Yep. Taqlid.
So when we think of Taqlid, the following
a madhab, following a school of thought, what
does that entail? It doesn't entail following them
in beliefs.
The core beliefs that everyone has, though, there's
no difference of opinion in those. There's only
a difference of opinion in these subsidiary laws.
These fiqi rulings.
So there's going to be no takleed when
it comes to things which are the fundamentals
and the obvious. There's only takleed in those
things,
for example,
which are not clearly mentioned in the Quran
or Sunnah. That's one example.
There will be
a falling of a madhab in those messiah,
right, those
which seemed to apparently contradict each other. Those
ahadith and ayaat would apparently seem to contradict
each other. There would be
a fiqh approach in that. Right. There would
be fiqh, for example, in those Ayat, which
are which seem inexplicit. They're not so clear
as what is intended by them.
And
there will
be fiqh when it comes
to those tulsus which are open to multiple
meanings. So Quran and Al Hadith which have
multiple interpretations. There's going to be fiqh involved
in there. Meaning one scholar
might prefer one meaning based on this reasoning
another scholar might prefer another meaning based on
this there'll be fiqh when it comes to
those Masai
that are mentioned but their hookum is not
mentioned whether it's Farhad Wajib or Sunnah
so fiqh is restricted to these Masai
So I'll give you to give you an
example to make it clear. One example I
mentioned of the Khamer. Khamer is impermissible.
But does that
apply to other intoxicants?
Now that's something that Fiqh will tell us.
Right? So based on that, can we do
qiyaz? Can we apply
the prohibition that's in hamart or intoxicants?
That's a fiq discussion.
So
for another time fiq will be applicable will
be, for example, in those missile
which seem
to be contradicting each other.
For example, you have the hadith of Wal
bin Hajj al Din Midi. He says that
Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi wa sallallahu alaihi wa laihi
wa laddalin faqalaamin
wamadabiha sota and then he said amen loudly.
And then in in the same book, Tiramidi,
you have another narration from Wael bin Khajar
that says that that
he did not say Amin loudly. Rather he
said it softly.
So
this is again, do you have 2 narrations
which seem to apparently contradict each other. So
over here,
there is going to be fick involved. Right?
So the one which the head will give
preference to one narration based on this one
which that will give preference to or to
another narration based on certain proofs. So the
common question is that why don't we just
accept the Sahih Hadith and move on?
Right. That if there's a difference opinion,
why don't we just accept the Sahih Hadith?
So this cut so this brings us to
the question of what is Sahih Hadith? What
defines
Sahih Hadith? What are the conditions?
And you'll see once the conditions are mentioned,
you'll see that within those conditions there's a
difference of opinion on how you establish those
things.
So because of that, you will have an
impact in fix. To give you an example.
Let me take
open the example.
For example, when it comes to the validity
of a hadith, to act upon a hadith,
it needs to be sahi.
There are 5 conditions that must be present
to classify a hadith as sahi.
It needs to have a connected chain. It
goes back to Rasulullah
the integrity of the narrator must be proved
that he must be a person of taqwa
the accuracy of the narrator must be proved
that he is a person of strong memory
he's sane mature
and the text and the chain must be
free from any error
So this is what a Sahih Hadith is.
So now what does a connected chain mean?
Imam Bukhari
He says a connected chain
is when you have evidence of consecutive narrators
narrating meeting each other.
That when it's proven that this narrator met
this narrator. It has to be proven.
And whereas Imam Muslim says that no. It's
not necessarily
that it be proven that this narrator met
this narrator.
There doesn't need to be some witness
that mentions that no, these 2 met.
But he says that is
enough. That there needs to be a possibility
of them meeting. So for example, if one
person is narrating
from another person,
it needs to be proven that it's possible
for these 2 people to have met. Meaning,
they lived in a distance from each other
where it was possible
for them to meet each other. Or he
passed away at this time, and yes it's
possible that at this age he traveled over
there and met him. It must be possible.
You don't need to prove through another witness
that they met. So there's a difference
in the approach that Imam Bukhari takes and
Imam Muslim takes. In regarding what is a
connected chain. So you can see from that
you're gonna have a have a impacted fiqh.
How will that impact come is that 1
Mujtahhid,
one expert
might accept these ahadith because they have
because they fulfill the conditions of Imam Bukhari
with Subut Al Lika
and derive rulings from those ahadith.
Right. Whereas
he may reject those ahadith which do not
fulfill that condition.
If you take Imam Muslims condition which is
just in qaanul luka, that there needs to
be a possibility of them meeting. So he
may reject those ahadith and not derive rulings
from them, because it doesn't meet his condition.
Whereas another Mujtadh might take Imam Bukhari's approach
and then he's able to, take those ahadith
that fulfill this condition and then it fulfills
the above and fulfills the above condition,
and derive rulings from both a Hadith.
So sometimes that
in the the methodology,
there's a difference of opinion in the methodology
and that impacts FICC.
Another
difference of opinion can come with regards to
Mursul Hadith.
A Mursul Hadith is when the Sahabi is
omitted. So Tabi is narrating something.
He said that Rasulullah Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam
said this.
He's not mentioning the Sahabi,
But he's mentioning that Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam
said this. So would you accept a Mursal
Al Hadith? So there's a difference of approach.
Imam
Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad, they say
that it's reliable. A Mursal report is reliable.
Why? Because these are the best of generations
narrating.
So even if they omit the Sahabi, it's
understood that they took it from a Sahabi,
and they're narrating it forward. Whereas, Imam Shafi
says that, Mursul Hadith will be accepted only
if it means these five conditions. It's supported,
for example, by another Musnath connected hadith, or
it's supported by
a saying of a Sahabi.
Right. So there needs to be other evidence
to the to accept the Muslim Hadith. So
again, the methodology.
Right. Is going to impact Fikth. Right. If
if we go by
group 1's methodology,
they will accept more ahadith and will be
able to derive more rulings from those. Whereas
if we go by group 2's analogy, they
might reject some ahadith because it doesn't fulfill
the condition and those ahadith will not be
suitable for them to derive akham rulings from
them. So the difference in methodology
when it comes to another condition when it
comes to Sahih Ahadif
is that the narrator must be 'Adil Upright,
Righteous, and Person of Taqwa.
Now how do you define a person who
is righteous?
There's a difference in methodology.
One group will say that to prove Adala,
trustworthiness,
there needs to be testimony by people
that this person
is a trustworthy person.
Another group will say no. There's there's no
need for a testimony.
There must not be any criticism made on
against him. That's that is sufficient to make
him con to say that he's Adil. So
again,
because of the difference of approach in the
methodology,
that's going to impact which a hadith you
accept. And because of that, fic will be
impacted.
So the fic is impacted because of the
a difference in the methodology.
Right?
And
also fiqh is impacted because many times the
ahadith they're reviable manah.
To understand that the Quran
is reviable love. That whatever
Rasulullah
whatever was revealed
to Rasulullah
he conveyed that exact same thing. Alright.
And the words are unchanged.
Right. Whereas when it comes to ahadith,
whatever the Messenger
said, the Sahaba conveyed
those ahadith forward, but they conveyed it in
their own words. They didn't convey word to
word what Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said. This
is called Rebayah Bil Mana.
So it's possible that you have 1 per
narrator that narrates it with this word. Another
narrator narrates it with a different word. And
because of that, that impacts fiqh.
A deceased,
there's falashayya alayhi, there's nothing against him.
Right? Meaning it's it's it's
a good act, it's a rewarding act, and
there's no sin on this person.
Whereas another another narration
says, Mansalaalalalal
Janaza Fil Masjid Falashay Allahu.
Right. The change of the last there's nothing
for him.
So the the group that accepts the first
Hadith
will say that it is permissible
to pray Salatul Janaz in the Masjid. Whereas
the group that goes by the second hadith,
right, they will say it is not permissible
to pray Salatul Janazah in the Masjid, it
must be prayed outside.
So because a hadith are revaiable ma'ana,
they are narrated forward,
They're conveyed in their meaning. They're not verbatim
word for word like the Quran. So there's
going to be a difference of opinion.
And and sometimes
just the one haraka can change the meaning
of the word. Again, when
we have the ahadith in front of us,
sometimes we have to determine how did Rasulullah
SAWSAWN read this.
Right. Did he read it with a damma
kasra fata? How did he read this word?
To give one example to understand this.
The 'Amil, the zakat collector. He's being told
that woman That
whoever prevents from giving it, we're going to
take it and
and we're going to take half of his
wealth.
Again, we don't have the eharab in front
of us. So this could be read in
2 ways. This could be read and
his wealth will be divided into 2, and
we will take the better half.
So how do
you read the words? How are the eharab?
That will again that also has an impact
in fiqh.
So based on that, there's a lot of
things that take into consideration how to why
the it makes sense why there are multiple
math hubs now because
of
how what what methodology
you use to get to the answer
and what systems you use, you know,
would give you a different answer because, okay,
based on the your criteria,
you could come to a different conclusion. Exactly.
And that's why
you can't take one fic ruling from this
madhhab and another fic ruling from this madhhab.
Why? Because then you have you begin you're
going to be contradicting yourself
unknowingly. For example, you took this ruling
which was based on this hadith
which the Imam accepted because it met this
criteria.
For example, let's say it was a Mursal
narration
and this Imam accepts this Mursal narration.
He accepts that this narrator is Adil for
example. Whereas the other imam does not accept
that narrator to be Adil.
So he doesn't accept that narration or he
accepts another narrator to be Adil which this
imam does not accept.
So now,
again,
you're contradicting yourself when you take both the
rulings
because for that one person, this Imam is
saying he's not trustworthy,
and the other is saying trustworthy. So in
one you're taking it, and one you're not
taking it.
So that's why
the the main the reason for the difference
of opinion,
again, is is based based because of their
methodology. How are they arriving at their conclusion?
So how would you go about following a
method then?
For the layman,
right?
We have to adhere to one methodology.
And these
Madahib,
right,
are the way to approach it. Right? And
one very common question is that, why don't
we follow the Madah with the Sahaba
Right. And Imam Nabi
mentions that the Sahaba were Allah than us.
They were more Alam than us. Right. They
were more knowledgeable than us. So why don't
we follow their madhhab?
It's because their madhhab
has not reached us in a codified manner.
We don't we won't find a book of
Abu Bakr
or Umar
managing and going
through all the Ababa Fiqh
from Tahara to Salah. We won't find that.
But when it comes to the Madahib, it's
been codified. It's been documented.
Right? The Sahab al Adiyam,
again, like any science any science, over time
it involves over time it gets codified, written
down. And that's exactly what happened to the
the madahib really the difference of opinion
is based on the difference
madahib that the sahaba had
is based on that the different understanding the
sahaba the different approaches that the sahaba had
that is basically what the Malahib are conveying,
and it's in a codified manner.
So,
like, if somebody wanted to study a Malahib,
like, an English person, you know, speaking person
wants to study a Malahib, What would you
say is a math hub that has the
most, like, content translated into English that you
can have access?
Right.
The 4 mainstream math hub. Right? They have
they're really you know, they're they're very easily
accessible,
and you can find the rulings,
regarding your you know, any any scenario that
comes about. And then you have experts in
these madahib that can guide you. So now
when you have experts of, 2 different madahibs,
how are the differences kind of resolved? Like,
if you,
like in a community,
there is an issue
and,
you know, you have 2 different methods. 1
person is saying one way, one person says
another. How how do they solve that kind
of,
It's only again in the subsidiary laws. Right?
So
it shouldn't be a matter of disunity.
If, for example, one person is following a
certain methodology,
right? At times you may be able to
accommodate both, right? For example, for Asar Salah,
one mother might say that Asar time started
this another Mambu Hanifa says it starts later
when the shadows doubled at the length
twice its length.
So
you could accommodate both. But sometimes you can't.
So but again, even if you're not able
to accommodate, just because you're not able to
accommodate, that shouldn't translate into disunity.
So
in in the for example, the example they
gave right now,
like, the astagh time prayer one. Hanafeez, they
pray late, you said, because, they wait until
your shadow is twice,
your length.
So
does that initiate, like, the the beginning of
salah, or is that, like, the most appropriate
time? Because, like, you know, the you have
the 3 other Starting time. The starting time.
But the other 3,
they consider when it's your first, like, one
that same length as you, your first your
shadow. That would be the starting time for
them. Okay. That's the shadow that was there
at the scene. Okay.
Alright.
So in order to accommodate accommodate both,
if you prayed at the Hanafi time, it
would kinda accommodate for both of them. Is
that what you're saying? Like, if you wanted
to accommodate a Hanafi versus a or.
Yeah. I'm yeah. I'm getting at that, but
my main thing is that the difference of
opinions
we see, for example, one person is saying
Amin Aloud.
One person is raising his hands.
These issues,
these subsidiary issues,
they're not the fundamentals
of our Deen.
So
these things should not cause any disunity.
This is not gonna be the difference that's
gonna cause somebody from either entering no. Jannah
or not. Right? No. No. Alright.
But it's very important to understand
why these difference of opinions came about. It's
because many times there's misconception,
and many times the madadah were labeled as
Bidah innovations.
Right? And sometimes
it goes to the extent that people that
follow a certain school, they're called mushrikeen.
They're associating partners with Allah. They're not following
what Allah and His Messenger has said, but
they're following what a person has said. That's
why it's important to clarify that exactly what
are the Mataih?
Right? Why how do we have a why
is there a difference of opinion? Why how
that came about?
How it's
again, it's
the difference of opinion is not because they're
making their own laws. Right? There's a difference
of opinion based because of their method methodology.
And they're all going back to the Quran
and Sunnah. So what if you have a
majority, you know, like,
minority is the Hanafi and then majority is
everybody else and they wanna pray early Asr.
Would a person who is a follower of
Hanafi, would they be
kind of
In this particular ruling, there's there's flexibility.
Mhmm. So if Can the Hanafi person pray
pray early with the, JAMA' so that way
Yeah. So this he gets the benefit. Since
the whole if
the congregation
is following a particular time for Assur, they're
following the first Assur one, then in this
in this scenario, flexibility, then that Hanafi follower
can also follow that time. Because I
oh, this is what I was gonna ask
you.
Even all the 4 madhhabs, like, even there's
more than 4, but they all come to
the conclusion. They say they tell you that
this this is not, like, mandatory,
that you have to follow this. If you
find a hadith that's stronger,
you know just follow that you know that
we're not
That's also
a very common question that all the Imma
have said
that
If this hadith is Sahid, then that's my
mother. Meaning if you see see a hadith,
you pick a Bukhari, you see the hadith,
and you should follow that hadith
even if it goes against
the mother of your Imam.
So again, we have to see who
were being addressed
when the Imam is saying this that Ida
Sahal Hadith for Muhammad Habib. Who was the
audience? And these audiences are the other fuqaha.
They are the other experts. It's not for
a layman that when you see a hadith
that contradicts the mother that followed the hadith
and leaves the mother of the Imam
Because we have not we don't have that
in-depth knowledge.
Right. So let me give you one example.
In Bukhari, the Hadith comes that Jama'r Rasulullah
Baynazuhurwal
Asar
that he combined
Zuhr and Asr Maghrib and Asr in Madinah,
meaning he is a Muqim, he is a
resident, he is not traveling,
And there was no khoof and there was
no rain.
And he combined. So now we know that
you can't
just combine all the salawat. Right? You have
to pray salah and it's an appointed time.
So if I were to just pick up
look at that hadith which is in Bukhary
and come to my own understanding. Okay. You
know, if it's a difficult time, you know,
if it's difficult, you can combine all your
Salahs and pray in one time.
That would be something absurd. That that is
a conclusion
that has
been never said before. That no one has
reached that conclusion. Right. Again, and why are
we coming with that conclusion? Because of our
ignorance
regarding the, how,
regarding the sciences of Hadith. How to extract,
extract Akham from Hadith. Right. So for example
this hadith.
What is the
background to this hadith? What is the,
how do we understand this hadith? This is
what Fiqh will tell us. So Imam Malik
explains that this was
in Madinah
when
this was in Madinah, and what Jama over
here means is Jama Suri.
Not Jama Haqqiki. Not actual come combining the
2 salas
praying both salas in one salah time. No.
Rather this is delaying Duhur until the end
time of Duhur and then praying Asr in
the beginning time. So you are praying Duhur
at the end
of the Duhur and then Asr right at
the beginning. So it looks like you're combining
so it looks like you're doing Jannah, and
you are doing Jannah, but you're not doing
Jannah Haqqiqah. Then you're not praying Asr in
the time of Duhr salah.
So you would come to
many absurd conclusions. If we were just look
at the hadith
because another example Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said
that if a person passes wind he doesn't
have to do wudu
except
that you know there's a sound.
Right? Except there's a sound there's sound and
snow. So if it's silent,
a person doesn't have to do with du.
But we know the understanding that we have
is that which is a correct if a
person passes wind whether you hear yourself, you
don't you know, you didn't the sound couldn't
be heard
whether it smells or not, a person's wudu
breaks and he has to do wudu again.
So then
again, if a person were to just look
at this hadith and then start following this
hadith, again his salah would be invalid.
Fik comes to explain this. Right. Fik will
tell us that no, this was said in
a certain context.
Rasulullah
was talking to
a person
that had wasaves, that would think that my
wudu is always getting broken and broken. So
this person he said this.
So that, you know, he forgets his wasaves.
He forgets the whispers that are coming. So
just if if we see a hadith,
and that seems to contradict
our madhhab
that we're following,
we should understand
that the
madhhab has a deli which supports the position
that it has,
even if we don't understand that position. Even
if you don't even if you don't have
the proof to that. Right? So based on
that,
we as like layman or something like that,
anybody who's not like a student of knowledge
or something like that can't just take a
hadith for face value and just run off
with it. Right? Because you might not always
come to the correct conclusion.
The and this is not just in our
this is in any field. Like, when you
go to the doctor and the doctor tells
you you have to take this medication.
Now you're not gonna ask the doctor why
this medication.
Even if the doctor told you you should
not be able to understand.
Because again, you don't have that background. You
don't know what's if even the doctor told
you these are the ingredients in here. You
would not understand what that means. Right? So
you're following someone.
Right? There's a difference between following someone without
asking for without
proof and without demanding for proof. We're so
this is called difference authority. Right? We're not
following them thinking that they don't have any
proof. No. We're following them without demanding proof
knowing that they have proof behind what they're
saying.
Right. And the madha'ib, remember, it's not just
one person's
judgment
or one person's understanding of the Quran and
Sunnah. No. There in every school you had
multiple people that adhere to the same methodology.
Right? So if there was a lapse by
the Imam or a hadith missed the Imam,
right? Like you mentioned, that's Saqal Hadith for
Muhammad. If a hadith missed the Imam, then
there were scholars of hadith
that came in that madhhab and rectified those
lapses.
Alright. That makes sense.
What role what role does, Ijma'a,
the consensus play in the development of fiqh?
Ijma'a is one of the sources of Islamic
law.
And
Rasulullah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said that La Istima
Ummatiya Ladalala. That my Ummah will not be
guided,
will not gather on misguidance.
And how Imam Nawi and Mulla Alaihi Rahimullah,
classical scholars explain this hadith is it means
that 'Ummah' over here means 'ulama'.
That the 'ulama' of my 'umma' in any
era
will not
come to a bottle conclusion.
We'll not come to a incorrect conclusion.
So Ijma
is something we find
from the time of the sahabat
But even after that, in every era you
had ulama coming. New messiah came, new problems
came, and there were consensus consensus.
That's the ulama of that era had a
had a agreement on a certain thing. So
it is, it is very key thing. And
again, the secondary sources of Islamic law, right,
they're based in the primary sources
of Islamic law. They're based in the Quran
and Sunnah. That kinda makes sense. So the
ijma, the consensus, it's not just like a
group, like everybody in the community, hey, what
do you guys think about this kind of
thing? No. It's actually scholars
getting together and the that consensus between the
scholars of well well learned people who have
the knowledge and the background,
and the proper understanding of the deen to
come to that conclusion. This way,
says that The consensus, it has to be
within knowledge. Right? So you can't ask people
that don't have knowledge in that field to
come to a con you know, conclusion.
So what what advice would you have for
someone who wants to actually, like, learn about
faq or become a student of knowledge?
It's very important to find the correct teachers.
It's very important to find the correct teachers.
If there's
you know, you have and you have to
see
that the teacher that you have, right, the
opinions that he has,
are these the opinions that our classical scholars
had? Right.
And you'll see, this is very important to
note that
in our history, in our history,
a 1000 plus years, you have the
Many of
the very well known classical Islamic scholars
adhere to a madahib.
Many
and it's only in the last 200 years
you'll find people that became non conformist.
They were anti madhhab or no madhhab.
So it's very important that the teacher also
adheres to madhhab because remember, this is something
that has
a very big impact on the way a
person is going to understand the Qur'an and
Sunnah.
Right. So it's very important that his understanding
is traditional and classic.
Alright. So,
think of it as a scenario where, like,
you're the imam of a community and you
have, community members who have different math hubs.
How would you go about, you know, reconciling
issues,
between them? Like, the community members that come
together, they wanna,
like, I don't know. They wanna do something
or they wanna come to agreement on one
specific thing, but everybody's like, oh, no. We
should do it this way. Other group is
saying this way. Another is saying, no. We
should do it this way.
How would you reconcile that? Generally, the difference
of opinions we have in a masjid
generally doesn't have to do much with the
madahib.
What I've noticed is not to do with
Madahib.
It's to do with,
you know,
understanding that recently people have came up with.
Right. It's not like a traditional difference of
opinion,
less as in the which is based on
methodology. It's a difference opinion based on something
which is very recent. Right? So it's not
really to do with
the. Alright. Thank you, Mufti Awez for coming
to Utica Masjid. It was a pleasure.
That was a beautiful quote you gave today.
You're welcome here anytime. It's okay. We'd love
to have you again.