jazakallah khair for this video. it helped a layman like me to appreciate the steelman for madhaib and understand that it does not entail blind following
وقال ابن القيم في إعلام الموقعين ٢/٣٦٨: أما أن نقعد قاعدة ونقول هذا هو الأصل، ثم ترد السنة لأجل مخالفة تلك القاعدة، فلعمر الله، لهدم ألف قاعدة لم يؤصلها الله ورسوله أفرض علينا من رد حديث واحد انتهى
JazaakAllahu Khairan ustadh. Would you recommend studying a matn in fiqh (like Risalah Jamiah in Shafi Fiqh/Bidayatul Abid in Hanbali fiqh) simultaneously with UmdatulAhkam OR to complete the matn in fiqh first?
You should complete a full book of fiqh that covers every single topic in general first. Of course, while doing this, you will reference the evidences briefly, and then after this you would study Hadith of ahkam.
If the ulema who doesn't ascribe to a madhab rules againsts the ijma, its khata (mistake) and every person is infallible. Even if you follow a madhab, one can still make mistake as mentioned earlier!
السلام عليكم Brother since you study at the Sharia part of Azhar, I was wondering if you could share how many years that specific course your taking lasts for? Love your content and work btw بارك الله فيك
Regarding some of the scholars going againt the ijmaa' of blood being najis it's not a clear mistake but rather a difference of opinion, they dispute the ijmaa itself, there are athar from sahaba and tabi'een like Ibn Umar and Hasan Al Basri that point to the fact that this ijmaa' isn't like so as the sunnah goes against it
As I mentioned, all of these reports that you have given are not reports of them saying that it is pure (طهارة [ṭahārah]). We don’t have reports of them saying it was pure, but rather there are practical leniencies given for types of impurities (نجاسة [najāsah]) that are difficult to be free of. So we still say it’s impure (نجس [najis]), just like if a woman has constant bleeding (استحاضة [istiḥāḍah]); we would say that this is still najis without a doubt, but she’s allowed to pray with it. So there’s no contradiction here. This is a leniency that’s made out of necessity, but it doesn’t change the actual ruling. And none of these reports actually say that this is something that is pure, but rather this is something that might cause someone to ask, “How are they able to pray while they had najis?” Ie: this is an understanding arrived at by istanbaat. The answer is that they are in an extreme circumstance where they are unable to be free from it. So in this case, ṣalāh (صلاة [ṣalāh]) is still obligatory, and they are still allowed to pray with this najis. Whenever we come across different ḥadīths (أحاديث [aḥādīth]) that seem to point to a certain understanding, but we have consensus (إجماع [ijmāʿ]) from other scholars, we don’t disregard and question the consensus when we have consensus relayed in a clear matter without a doubt in its authenticity. Rather, we say this consensus points to the fact that these ḥadīths are muʾawwal (مؤول), that they have a different understanding, and they must be understood in light of that consensus. Just like we have consensus on the meaning of the word “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” (khātam al-nabiyyīn) in the Qur’an (33:40). While it could theoretically be interpreted as “the ring of the prophets” in Arabic, ijmāʿ establishes that it means “the seal and end of the prophets,” denoting finality, not merely excellence. This understanding is supported by Qur’anic commentators like Ibn Kathir, who explain that “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” means that the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) is the last prophet, with no prophets to come after him. And I’ve discussed this with some of the shuyūkh. I asked if the ijmāʿ was valid, and they had no response to say that the ijmāʿ is invalid. Instead, they continued citing other evidence. But ijmāʿ closes the door to any other evidence or type of reasoning based on specific texts. Occasionally, you will find cases where ijmāʿ alone clarifies that a particular text is not to be acted upon-such as the case of the fifth instance of someone drinking. As for the fifth time that someone drinks, the ḥadīth recorded in Sunan Abi Dawud and Sunan al-Tirmidhi states, “If someone drinks (intoxicants) a fourth time, then if he returns (a fifth time), kill him.” However, there is an established ijmāʿ among the scholars that habitual drinkers should not be executed, as mentioned by Imam al-Nawawi in al-Majmūʿ and Rawdat al-Tālibīn. Rather, the punishment remains as flogging or taʿzīr (discretionary punishment), up to 40 or 80 lashes. This consensus restricts the application of the ḥadīth, so the literal instruction for capital punishment is not applied. Other scholars, such as Ibn Qudamah in al-Mughnī, confirm that all four Sunni madhāhib agree on this, using ijmāʿ to prioritize the broader legal understanding over the apparent meaning of the ḥadīth.
@@DaudBurke where can I read up more on this interaction between a hadith that appears to be clear in it's wording and it contradicting a statement of consensus? Some scholars argue that a lot of times, views are promoted and supported by supposed claims of consensus, that when looked at deeply, don't really exist, meaning exist as something completely agreed upon, so how do we establish the authenticity of consensus? And if a person were to go against what scholar's mention as being consensus because they perceive the hadith to be decisive in nature and not circumstantial does that entail them going against the jamaa'ah?
I’m still looking into the matter for more information that talk about these details and give more examples. But if we have ijma and then find a different opinion beforehand than that breaks the claim of ijmaa unless we say we can have ijma after a difference. One of the other examples that comes to mind is 3 talaqs in one sitting. We have a Hadith that points to it being only one at the time of the prophet ﷺ and then Umar رضي الله عنه made it three as he saw people were taking advantage of it. Then from there out we find many claims of ijma and then Ibn taymiyah and ibn qayyim went against them and took the original view that it’s only one… this created huge debates and this is an issue that is very tricky and I’ve yet to delve into all of it. But fun fact: the governmental fatwa is with Ibn taymiyah in Egypt and probably elsewhere as well.
وعَلَيْكُمُ السَّلامُ ورَحْمةُ اللهِ وبَرَكاتُه Every place has its pros and cons, I’m not familiar with Medina or the environment so I can’t speak on that from personal knowledge. Other people have been there to study and can inform you better than me. From what I’ve heard the amount of Arabic teachers there is limited compared to Egypt.
@@DaudBurke بارك الله فيك. I’m particularly interested in learning more about Fiqh and Aqeedah, and I was wondering if you had any insights on studying these subjects in Madinah. Also, if you have the time, as I understand that a student of knowledge’s time is precious, could you explain the application process for Al-Azhar and offer some advice on budgeting? Specifically, I’d like to know how much one should prepare financially to cover the costs of living and studying full time.
@@DaudBurke I would also like to ask, whenever you have the time, if you could share your thoughts on Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab and whether he could be considered a mujaddid. You seem to approach things with a very analytical perspective, and I’ve come across arguments from Ottoman inclined scholars suggesting he might not be, due to the polarization he caused among Muslims. May Allah strengthen you in your pursuit of knowledge brother.
@@S.h6775 what were the arguments of said ottoman inclined scholars if you don't mind me asking? A lot of times he is accused of holding views that he personally didn't hold or of doing things that aren't being retold in the same manner in which they occurred.
Akhi, do more research. Not all people who don't ascribe to madhab are like Dhahiris. There are Ahlul hadith who have Ijma as acceptable evidence but the ijma has to be concrete and well established. Sometime madhabis mention ijma when all the scholars of there specific madhab agrees on something which is wrong!
If Hanafis took from "school" of Ibn Masud, then what made you not link the other 3 madhab to there respective sahabas? Well because we all know the Malik, Shafi and Ahmed were students of one after another so technically they all should be linked to one sahaba with one school. But that didn't happen which is why you only spoke about hanafis and left the other schools to decieve your audience. These aimah were ahlul hadith and the ahlul hadith of this generation is the same, we take from our teachrers and leave of what is not correct and thats what these imams did and many scholars did the same after them like imam bukhari, imam muslim, ibn taymiyah, ibn Qayyim, Imam Shawkani, ibn hazam, albani, muqbil, and currently many from indo pak subcontinent. Be trutful to your self.
uhh, ibn abbas's school was inherited by Shafi'i and ibn umar and the companions that stayed in madinah by malik ibn anas. Abu Haneefah has some differences with ahlul-hadith scholars like malik, shafi'i and ahmad, but they all respected him. It is commendable that ahle hadees are against taqleed and ta'assub but sometimes the eagerness of staying away from ta'assub for abi hanifa leads to ta'assub against him. He was an imam in his own right, and his school deserves respect. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad ash Shaybani were both salafi in aqidah one of them if not both also studied under Imam Malik if I'm not mistaken.
No one says no need of madhab books. Who are against madahib are not against there books but the ascription to madahib which was not during the time of first 3 generation and usually make people fall into tassub of madhab! We say, instead of starting with madhab books, start with Quran and hadiths and its sciences and when you are knowledgeable enough, then see the books of madhab just to see how these kibar ulema have extracted ruling from hadith.
No matter how you justify by pointing the mistakes of Ahlul hadith ( la madhabi according to you), The Quran and Sunnah is not in need of madhab to be obeyed. None of the imams of these madhab had a madhab and most of them went against the madhab of there teachers and none of them wanted to create a madhab. Everyone said follow Quran and Sunnah to the best of ones ability.
Akhi you started good but slowly started madhabi brain washed language. For the first 700 years of islam, there was no madhab, and people were ascribed to their teachers. Leaving of teacher when on there mistake is easier then leaving madhab. We have seen enough Hanafis justifying and inventing usool to reject hadiths. Also you comment that Madhab is the only way to understand Quran and Sunnah, may Allah guide you, we have a number of muhaditheen and fuqaha from Salaf and khalaf who were able to understand fiqh in much better way without ascribing to any madhab. Your another statement that Sahaba had school is also brain washed mentality. Sahab used to encourage people to ask other sahabas if they weren't sure of the answer.
When I said there’s no way to understand the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة) without the madhhabs (المذاهب), this is speaking from a practical perspective, not an absolute one. Generally, there are no books that can provide a cohesive understanding without adhering to one of the madhhabs. These madhhabs have established a structured path of knowledge that enables one to truly understand them. This approach is for the purpose of understanding, not for blind following. Almost everything you’ll find within the madhhabs is rooted in the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة). Of course, there are additional elements here and there that we can discuss. But even within the madhhabs, you’ll often find that these additions are supported by the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة). It may involve a different opinion that isn’t the most commonly accepted view, but it still exists within the madhhab. For someone to simply pick up ‘Umdat al-Ahkam (عمدة الأحكام) or Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) and derive their fiqh (فقه) solely from these texts, they will miss a lot. This is because much of fiqh relies heavily on qiyas (قياس), which isn’t fully captured in the books of hadith (حديث). Personally, I went down this road and studied Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) before I studied Abu Shuja‘ (أبي شجاع). And what did I actually gain from it? Very little, because I didn’t fully understand the foundational aspects, like the categorization of water or the rules of wudu (وضوء). I didn’t grasp these concepts properly before delving into the books of hadith (حديث). And, regarding the issues heavily based on qiyas (قياس), you’ll find that within the subject of mu’amalat (معاملات), there are very few hadith (أحاديث) compared to the vast number of rulings derived from them. To go through only the hadith and then jump directly to issues of transactions (المعاملات) puts one at a significant disadvantage. You need someone to organize and contextualize all of these rulings in a way that facilitates understanding, which almost always involves qiyas. Yes, there is benefit in studying hadith, but if, for example, you were to study a book of fiqh (فقه) like al-Minhaj (المنهاج) by Imam al-Nawawi (الإمام النووي), you’ll see how the rulings are systematically presented. Then, with Ibn Mulaqqin’s (ابن الملقن) commentary that includes the evidences in support of al-Minhaj, you would find ample hadith (أحاديث) related to salah (صلاة), with numerous hadith for each aspect. This is excellent. However, when it comes to Bab al-Mu’amalat (باب المعاملات), there is a noticeable absence of direct hadith. Why? Because the madhhab (مذهب) relies on fundamental principles, derived from the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة), and then uses these principles as a foundation for the many rulings in mu’amalat. So, if you study Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام), can you expect to have a complete and cohesive understanding of mu’amalat by the end? No, you won’t achieve this unless you study within a madhhab, which is built upon a structured foundation of qiyas (قياس). If someone argues that abandoning the madhhab (مذهب) is akin to following the “Ahl al-Hadith” (أهل الحديث) methodology, this is a misconception. Who were the greatest contributors to the science of hadith (علم الحديث)? The founders of the madhhabs themselves, along with their students, are among the greatest contributors to hadith scholarship. Thus, following a madhhab does not imply blind following. It simply means that this person is a student of a particular school. I didn’t mention all the scholars individually because I mentioned Ibn Mas‘ud (ابن مسعود) separately, given his unique standing. But, of course, the founders of the madhhabs and their schools have deep-rooted connections with multiple Sahabah (صحابة) and their teachings. Hadith collections include a wide array of issues scattered across the various areas of fiqh. For example, the first hadith in Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) discusses water but also touches upon food and foodstuffs. This isn’t a bad approach per se, but studying hadith (حديث) means you’re covering topics from all over fiqh (فقه). Each hadith may contain benefits that span multiple areas, which, for a beginner, might not help them build a solid foundation. Instead, studying each section independently and then introducing the adillah (أدلة), or evidences, is more beneficial. You can bring in the evidences, but it’s not necessary to base your studies solely on a book of hadith (حديث). Additionally, if you rely solely on hadith (حديث), people will derive different interpretations of each hadith. However, if you follow a madhhab, you have a cohesive framework for understanding all the hadith (حديث) based on consistent principles. This framework guides your response to different types of hadith, allowing you to work with them in a structured manner. In the end, this approach develops a well-rounded student. On the other hand, when someone goes off on their own, they are just following one teacher rather than a school of collective scholarship. Naturally, this approach is more prone to mistakes, especially given the knowledge levels of contemporary teachers compared to those of the past. Undoubtedly, the understanding of Arabic (العربية) and other sciences (علوم) in our time differs significantly from how it was in earlier generations. The depth and accuracy are simply not the same.
@@DaudBurke after reading your response, it seems like your views are shaped by some past negative experiences. You are not fully aware of what heAhlul Hadith scholars, such as Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, Imam Ahmad, and Imam Bukhari (rahimahumullah) carried over to next generations, and how their madhab of Ahlul Hadith has developed its approach to deriving fiqh without adhering strictly to any single madhab, instead using the works of these scholars as tools. My advice would be to travel to the Indo-Pak subcontinent and spend some time learning from authentic Ahlul Hadith ulema there. I once traveled to Houston and couldn't find a single Ahlul Hadith masjid, so I can understand your situation. When there isn’t proper Ahlul Hadith scholarship available, it's understandable to start with a specific madhab due to the lack of scholarship. However, creating a video based on personal experiences and criticizing the Ahlul Hadith approach as error-prone, without fully experiencing it, is a significant mistake. I advise you to fear Allah and remember that you will be held accountable for what you say. For your review, I'm sharing some statements from scholars: th-cam.com/video/Oh223IQtr0c/w-d-xo.htmlsi=tSE7MNK6kdO6GW18 th-cam.com/video/sjn6WqxI40I/w-d-xo.htmlsi=3RkfHsCasotmzBOB I would finally recommend that since due to lack of scholarship, you are studying a madhab, whenever you have time, fill you chest with Quran and sunnah by memorizing set amount of hadith daily. Assalamualaikum!
Your last advice is very good, and of course, you’re talking about personal experiences and whatnot. I brought my references for these things and actual experiences. I have Shiuch whom I very highly respect that follow along this line of rejection of the Madhhabs, but as far as students actually learning well, it’s best for them to learn alongside the Madhhab. This is from personal experience with people who have gone this route and others who have gone a different route. Of course, the issue is not with adhering to these things; it’s with rigid adherence that can sometimes accompany following a Madhhab-not the fact that they’re learning and understanding how scholars thought about these issues. When someone deeply engages within a Madhhab, they don’t just see one view from the Madhhab but see the various perspectives within it. There is a lot of freedom that comes from exploring the multiple views within a Madhhab, which aligns with the nuanced understanding of the Hadith and incorporates specific principles that come about through such study. And the last point you mentioned, about always memorizing Quran and Hadith, is very, very good-without a doubt. Imam al-Shafi’i also emphasized this, saying that anyone who increases their memorization or knowledge of the Sunnah gains a stronger ability to provide evidence and grows in understanding. The issue with some who focus solely on the Madhahib is that they may sometimes become distanced from the Hadith. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned this point regarding Imam al-Juwayni, noting that despite his brilliance and ability to contribute significantly to Fiqh, his limited knowledge of Hadith led him into certain mistakes, especially in Aqidah, due to this lack of connection. Additionally, some of my teachers have recommended a regular regimen of reading the Quran daily. Most students know the importance of this along with memorization and reading the Sunnah. I’ve spoken in another video on how to approach reading the Sunnah. Without a doubt, this should always be paired with one’s study of Fiqh. If someone combines both Fiqh and Sunnah, this is excellent. But if they leave out the Sunnah and study only Fiqh, it can lead to significant issues.
@@DaudBurke the real problem is not tassub ( firm adherence to a madhab). That is merely result of the real problem, which is replacing the ilm of wahi (Quran and Sunnah) with saying and understanding of specific group of scholars. If students start with the Quran and Sunnah, memorizing portions of them, then progress through the Kutub as-Sitta, gaining insight into which hadith are sahih and da'if, they can then use the books of the madhhabs as tools to understand scholarly rulings. This approach allows them to discern which madhhab relies on sahih hadith and which may rely on da'if, or know that which madhab has based their ruling on saheeh hadith and which based on a usul due to lack of finding hadith, so they can respectfully set aside a madhhab’s stance when it conflicts with authentic evidence, thus avoiding ta'assub. The main concern we are highlighting is the methodology of seeking knowledge. We argue that the Quran and Sunnah should be given their rightful positions within the curriculum, while the statements of people should be accorded their appropriate, secondary place.
@@afnankhan5989 The problem that you mentioned is literally the definition of ta'assub tho 😭isn't ta'assub blindly following and adhering to the statement of a person JUST because they said it? And that wasn't the point that brother Daud is even trying to make. The issue is your conflating the methodology of studying fiqh through a structure so that a person has a basis to worship Allah, for example, when a person reads the 1st of 2nd recommended book that MadhHabs mention to study. The problem is when people stop just there and cling to the matn, not looking into the evidences for these rulings and how they were derived. But if a person goes through the book Ar-Risaalah by Ibn Abi Zayd Al Qayrawani in the maliki fiqh, for example, and they also read an explanation like الثمر الداني which goes into the evidences for what Ibn Abi Zaid mentioned, then they aren't a muqallid and a muta'assib, nore are they replacing the ilm of wahi with the sayings of a single groups of scholars. They have a starting point upon which they worship Allah, knowing the authentic evidences from the Quran and Sunnah from which said opinions are derived. But if a person picks up العمدة في الأحكام or بلوغ المرام, they won't be sufficed to understand the rulings of all situations. Not only would they have to go through longer books like اللؤلؤ والمرجان and the كتب الستة but they would have to go through multiple fiqh focused books, like san'aanis subul and some of shawkani's books, and it'll take all the way till they get to نيل الأوطار or another longer book in fiqh before they have that basis which they wouldve reached in the 4 or 5 madhHab books while simmultaniously exposing themselves to the evidences. And these matters aren't contradictory. A brother will talk about someone for putting their hands below the navel and you ask them why and they'll say they read it in صفة الصلاة by al-Albani may Allah have mercy upon him. I personally am all for the ahle-hadees, hadith-first way if they could agree to two things; 1) there's nothing wrong with studying fiqh based on the madhHab as long as a person gives the evidences their due right (by researching them and knowing the evidences for their stances) and 2) there isn't a blind hatred against a madhHab or a position held by a madhHab because of the statement of a La-MadhHabi scholar.
JazakAllahu khayr wa barakAllahu feek. May Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala guide you, protect you and increase your ilm.
jazakallah khair for this video. it helped a layman like me to appreciate the steelman for madhaib and understand that it does not entail blind following
jazakallah khair dear brother
السلام عليكم
Brother in sha allah can you please make a tour of your library video
بارك الله فيك
Can you also do a video on Imam Shawkani's approach to fiqh..what was his usool etc?
BaarakAllahufeekum
Great vid idea
Jazak Allahu Khayran
وقال ابن القيم في إعلام الموقعين ٢/٣٦٨: أما أن نقعد قاعدة ونقول هذا هو الأصل، ثم ترد السنة لأجل مخالفة تلك القاعدة، فلعمر الله، لهدم ألف قاعدة لم يؤصلها الله ورسوله أفرض علينا من رد حديث واحد انتهى
JazaakAllahu Khairan ustadh.
Would you recommend studying a matn in fiqh (like Risalah Jamiah in Shafi Fiqh/Bidayatul Abid in Hanbali fiqh) simultaneously with UmdatulAhkam OR to complete the matn in fiqh first?
You should complete a full book of fiqh that covers every single topic in general first. Of course, while doing this, you will reference the evidences briefly, and then after this you would study Hadith of ahkam.
If the ulema who doesn't ascribe to a madhab rules againsts the ijma, its khata (mistake) and every person is infallible. Even if you follow a madhab, one can still make mistake as mentioned earlier!
But at least your mistakes are understandable, and you’re not all by yourself in it. Ie you have a predecessor.
I posted a comment but it's not showing.
السلام عليكم
Brother since you study at the Sharia part of Azhar, I was wondering if you could share how many years that specific course your taking lasts for?
Love your content and work btw
بارك الله فيك
وعَلَيْكُمُ السَّلامُ ورَحْمةُ اللهِ وبَرَكاتُه
It’s a four year program just like a normal university
What Do We Study in Kuliyat (faculty of) Sharia at Al-Azhar University?
th-cam.com/video/mC_u8RW6Ghk/w-d-xo.html
Regarding some of the scholars going againt the ijmaa' of blood being najis it's not a clear mistake but rather a difference of opinion, they dispute the ijmaa itself, there are athar from sahaba and tabi'een like Ibn Umar and Hasan Al Basri that point to the fact that this ijmaa' isn't like so as the sunnah goes against it
As I mentioned, all of these reports that you have given are not reports of them saying that it is pure (طهارة [ṭahārah]). We don’t have reports of them saying it was pure, but rather there are practical leniencies given for types of impurities (نجاسة [najāsah]) that are difficult to be free of. So we still say it’s impure (نجس [najis]), just like if a woman has constant bleeding (استحاضة [istiḥāḍah]); we would say that this is still najis without a doubt, but she’s allowed to pray with it. So there’s no contradiction here. This is a leniency that’s made out of necessity, but it doesn’t change the actual ruling.
And none of these reports actually say that this is something that is pure, but rather this is something that might cause someone to ask, “How are they able to pray while they had najis?” Ie: this is an understanding arrived at by istanbaat. The answer is that they are in an extreme circumstance where they are unable to be free from it. So in this case, ṣalāh (صلاة [ṣalāh]) is still obligatory, and they are still allowed to pray with this najis.
Whenever we come across different ḥadīths (أحاديث [aḥādīth]) that seem to point to a certain understanding, but we have consensus (إجماع [ijmāʿ]) from other scholars, we don’t disregard and question the consensus when we have consensus relayed in a clear matter without a doubt in its authenticity. Rather, we say this consensus points to the fact that these ḥadīths are muʾawwal (مؤول), that they have a different understanding, and they must be understood in light of that consensus. Just like we have consensus on the meaning of the word “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” (khātam al-nabiyyīn) in the Qur’an (33:40). While it could theoretically be interpreted as “the ring of the prophets” in Arabic, ijmāʿ establishes that it means “the seal and end of the prophets,” denoting finality, not merely excellence. This understanding is supported by Qur’anic commentators like Ibn Kathir, who explain that “خَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ” means that the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ) is the last prophet, with no prophets to come after him.
And I’ve discussed this with some of the shuyūkh. I asked if the ijmāʿ was valid, and they had no response to say that the ijmāʿ is invalid. Instead, they continued citing other evidence. But ijmāʿ closes the door to any other evidence or type of reasoning based on specific texts. Occasionally, you will find cases where ijmāʿ alone clarifies that a particular text is not to be acted upon-such as the case of the fifth instance of someone drinking.
As for the fifth time that someone drinks, the ḥadīth recorded in Sunan Abi Dawud and Sunan al-Tirmidhi states, “If someone drinks (intoxicants) a fourth time, then if he returns (a fifth time), kill him.” However, there is an established ijmāʿ among the scholars that habitual drinkers should not be executed, as mentioned by Imam al-Nawawi in al-Majmūʿ and Rawdat al-Tālibīn. Rather, the punishment remains as flogging or taʿzīr (discretionary punishment), up to 40 or 80 lashes. This consensus restricts the application of the ḥadīth, so the literal instruction for capital punishment is not applied. Other scholars, such as Ibn Qudamah in al-Mughnī, confirm that all four Sunni madhāhib agree on this, using ijmāʿ to prioritize the broader legal understanding over the apparent meaning of the ḥadīth.
@@DaudBurke barakAllahu feek for the detailed response, may Allah grant us fiqh of His religion
@@DaudBurke where can I read up more on this interaction between a hadith that appears to be clear in it's wording and it contradicting a statement of consensus? Some scholars argue that a lot of times, views are promoted and supported by supposed claims of consensus, that when looked at deeply, don't really exist, meaning exist as something completely agreed upon, so how do we establish the authenticity of consensus? And if a person were to go against what scholar's mention as being consensus because they perceive the hadith to be decisive in nature and not circumstantial does that entail them going against the jamaa'ah?
I’m still looking into the matter for more information that talk about these details and give more examples. But if we have ijma and then find a different opinion beforehand than that breaks the claim of ijmaa unless we say we can have ijma after a difference.
One of the other examples that comes to mind is 3 talaqs in one sitting. We have a Hadith that points to it being only one at the time of the prophet ﷺ and then Umar رضي الله عنه made it three as he saw people were taking advantage of it. Then from there out we find many claims of ijma and then Ibn taymiyah and ibn qayyim went against them and took the original view that it’s only one… this created huge debates and this is an issue that is very tricky and I’ve yet to delve into all of it.
But fun fact: the governmental fatwa is with Ibn taymiyah in Egypt and probably elsewhere as well.
Do you know teachers in Egypt who can teach Shafi'i fiqh online?
Email me
Do you know a trustworthy man in Cairo from whom i can rent a house/room to live in?
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته, would you recommend studying in Madinah?
وعَلَيْكُمُ السَّلامُ ورَحْمةُ اللهِ وبَرَكاتُه
Every place has its pros and cons, I’m not familiar with Medina or the environment so I can’t speak on that from personal knowledge. Other people have been there to study and can inform you better than me. From what I’ve heard the amount of Arabic teachers there is limited compared to Egypt.
@@DaudBurke بارك الله فيك.
I’m particularly interested in learning more about Fiqh and Aqeedah, and I was wondering if you had any insights on studying these subjects in Madinah. Also, if you have the time, as I understand that a student of knowledge’s time is precious, could you explain the application process for Al-Azhar and offer some advice on budgeting? Specifically, I’d like to know how much one should prepare financially to cover the costs of living and studying full time.
@@DaudBurke I would also like to ask, whenever you have the time, if you could share your thoughts on Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab and whether he could be considered a mujaddid. You seem to approach things with a very analytical perspective, and I’ve come across arguments from Ottoman inclined scholars suggesting he might not be, due to the polarization he caused among Muslims.
May Allah strengthen you in your pursuit of knowledge brother.
@@S.h6775he’s a mujaddid no doubt
@@S.h6775 what were the arguments of said ottoman inclined scholars if you don't mind me asking? A lot of times he is accused of holding views that he personally didn't hold or of doing things that aren't being retold in the same manner in which they occurred.
Akhi, do more research. Not all people who don't ascribe to madhab are like Dhahiris. There are Ahlul hadith who have Ijma as acceptable evidence but the ijma has to be concrete and well established.
Sometime madhabis mention ijma when all the scholars of there specific madhab agrees on something which is wrong!
If Hanafis took from "school" of Ibn Masud, then what made you not link the other 3 madhab to there respective sahabas? Well because we all know the Malik, Shafi and Ahmed were students of one after another so technically they all should be linked to one sahaba with one school.
But that didn't happen which is why you only spoke about hanafis and left the other schools to decieve your audience. These aimah were ahlul hadith and the ahlul hadith of this generation is the same, we take from our teachrers and leave of what is not correct and thats what these imams did and many scholars did the same after them like imam bukhari, imam muslim, ibn taymiyah, ibn Qayyim, Imam Shawkani, ibn hazam, albani, muqbil, and currently many from indo pak subcontinent.
Be trutful to your self.
uhh, ibn abbas's school was inherited by Shafi'i and ibn umar and the companions that stayed in madinah by malik ibn anas. Abu Haneefah has some differences with ahlul-hadith scholars like malik, shafi'i and ahmad, but they all respected him. It is commendable that ahle hadees are against taqleed and ta'assub but sometimes the eagerness of staying away from ta'assub for abi hanifa leads to ta'assub against him. He was an imam in his own right, and his school deserves respect. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad ash Shaybani were both salafi in aqidah one of them if not both also studied under Imam Malik if I'm not mistaken.
No one says no need of madhab books. Who are against madahib are not against there books but the ascription to madahib which was not during the time of first 3 generation and usually make people fall into tassub of madhab!
We say, instead of starting with madhab books, start with Quran and hadiths and its sciences and when you are knowledgeable enough, then see the books of madhab just to see how these kibar ulema have extracted ruling from hadith.
No matter how you justify by pointing the mistakes of Ahlul hadith ( la madhabi according to you), The Quran and Sunnah is not in need of madhab to be obeyed.
None of the imams of these madhab had a madhab and most of them went against the madhab of there teachers and none of them wanted to create a madhab.
Everyone said follow Quran and Sunnah to the best of ones ability.
Akhi you started good but slowly started madhabi brain washed language.
For the first 700 years of islam, there was no madhab, and people were ascribed to their teachers. Leaving of teacher when on there mistake is easier then leaving madhab. We have seen enough Hanafis justifying and inventing usool to reject hadiths.
Also you comment that Madhab is the only way to understand Quran and Sunnah, may Allah guide you, we have a number of muhaditheen and fuqaha from Salaf and khalaf who were able to understand fiqh in much better way without ascribing to any madhab.
Your another statement that Sahaba had school is also brain washed mentality. Sahab used to encourage people to ask other sahabas if they weren't sure of the answer.
When I said there’s no way to understand the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة) without the madhhabs (المذاهب), this is speaking from a practical perspective, not an absolute one. Generally, there are no books that can provide a cohesive understanding without adhering to one of the madhhabs. These madhhabs have established a structured path of knowledge that enables one to truly understand them. This approach is for the purpose of understanding, not for blind following. Almost everything you’ll find within the madhhabs is rooted in the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة). Of course, there are additional elements here and there that we can discuss. But even within the madhhabs, you’ll often find that these additions are supported by the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة). It may involve a different opinion that isn’t the most commonly accepted view, but it still exists within the madhhab.
For someone to simply pick up ‘Umdat al-Ahkam (عمدة الأحكام) or Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) and derive their fiqh (فقه) solely from these texts, they will miss a lot. This is because much of fiqh relies heavily on qiyas (قياس), which isn’t fully captured in the books of hadith (حديث). Personally, I went down this road and studied Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) before I studied Abu Shuja‘ (أبي شجاع). And what did I actually gain from it? Very little, because I didn’t fully understand the foundational aspects, like the categorization of water or the rules of wudu (وضوء). I didn’t grasp these concepts properly before delving into the books of hadith (حديث).
And, regarding the issues heavily based on qiyas (قياس), you’ll find that within the subject of mu’amalat (معاملات), there are very few hadith (أحاديث) compared to the vast number of rulings derived from them. To go through only the hadith and then jump directly to issues of transactions (المعاملات) puts one at a significant disadvantage. You need someone to organize and contextualize all of these rulings in a way that facilitates understanding, which almost always involves qiyas. Yes, there is benefit in studying hadith, but if, for example, you were to study a book of fiqh (فقه) like al-Minhaj (المنهاج) by Imam al-Nawawi (الإمام النووي), you’ll see how the rulings are systematically presented. Then, with Ibn Mulaqqin’s (ابن الملقن) commentary that includes the evidences in support of al-Minhaj, you would find ample hadith (أحاديث) related to salah (صلاة), with numerous hadith for each aspect. This is excellent.
However, when it comes to Bab al-Mu’amalat (باب المعاملات), there is a noticeable absence of direct hadith. Why? Because the madhhab (مذهب) relies on fundamental principles, derived from the Quran (القرآن) and Sunnah (السنة), and then uses these principles as a foundation for the many rulings in mu’amalat. So, if you study Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام), can you expect to have a complete and cohesive understanding of mu’amalat by the end? No, you won’t achieve this unless you study within a madhhab, which is built upon a structured foundation of qiyas (قياس).
If someone argues that abandoning the madhhab (مذهب) is akin to following the “Ahl al-Hadith” (أهل الحديث) methodology, this is a misconception. Who were the greatest contributors to the science of hadith (علم الحديث)? The founders of the madhhabs themselves, along with their students, are among the greatest contributors to hadith scholarship. Thus, following a madhhab does not imply blind following. It simply means that this person is a student of a particular school. I didn’t mention all the scholars individually because I mentioned Ibn Mas‘ud (ابن مسعود) separately, given his unique standing. But, of course, the founders of the madhhabs and their schools have deep-rooted connections with multiple Sahabah (صحابة) and their teachings.
Hadith collections include a wide array of issues scattered across the various areas of fiqh. For example, the first hadith in Bulugh al-Maram (بلوغ المرام) discusses water but also touches upon food and foodstuffs. This isn’t a bad approach per se, but studying hadith (حديث) means you’re covering topics from all over fiqh (فقه). Each hadith may contain benefits that span multiple areas, which, for a beginner, might not help them build a solid foundation. Instead, studying each section independently and then introducing the adillah (أدلة), or evidences, is more beneficial. You can bring in the evidences, but it’s not necessary to base your studies solely on a book of hadith (حديث).
Additionally, if you rely solely on hadith (حديث), people will derive different interpretations of each hadith. However, if you follow a madhhab, you have a cohesive framework for understanding all the hadith (حديث) based on consistent principles. This framework guides your response to different types of hadith, allowing you to work with them in a structured manner. In the end, this approach develops a well-rounded student. On the other hand, when someone goes off on their own, they are just following one teacher rather than a school of collective scholarship. Naturally, this approach is more prone to mistakes, especially given the knowledge levels of contemporary teachers compared to those of the past.
Undoubtedly, the understanding of Arabic (العربية) and other sciences (علوم) in our time differs significantly from how it was in earlier generations. The depth and accuracy are simply not the same.
@@DaudBurke
after reading your response, it seems like your views are shaped by some past negative experiences. You are not fully aware of what heAhlul Hadith scholars, such as Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i, Imam Ahmad, and Imam Bukhari (rahimahumullah) carried over to next generations, and how their madhab of Ahlul Hadith has developed its approach to deriving fiqh without adhering strictly to any single madhab, instead using the works of these scholars as tools.
My advice would be to travel to the Indo-Pak subcontinent and spend some time learning from authentic Ahlul Hadith ulema there. I once traveled to Houston and couldn't find a single Ahlul Hadith masjid, so I can understand your situation. When there isn’t proper Ahlul Hadith scholarship available, it's understandable to start with a specific madhab due to the lack of scholarship.
However, creating a video based on personal experiences and criticizing the Ahlul Hadith approach as error-prone, without fully experiencing it, is a significant mistake. I advise you to fear Allah and remember that you will be held accountable for what you say.
For your review, I'm sharing some statements from scholars:
th-cam.com/video/Oh223IQtr0c/w-d-xo.htmlsi=tSE7MNK6kdO6GW18
th-cam.com/video/sjn6WqxI40I/w-d-xo.htmlsi=3RkfHsCasotmzBOB
I would finally recommend that since due to lack of scholarship, you are studying a madhab, whenever you have time, fill you chest with Quran and sunnah by memorizing set amount of hadith daily.
Assalamualaikum!
Your last advice is very good, and of course, you’re talking about personal experiences and whatnot. I brought my references for these things and actual experiences. I have Shiuch whom I very highly respect that follow along this line of rejection of the Madhhabs, but as far as students actually learning well, it’s best for them to learn alongside the Madhhab. This is from personal experience with people who have gone this route and others who have gone a different route.
Of course, the issue is not with adhering to these things; it’s with rigid adherence that can sometimes accompany following a Madhhab-not the fact that they’re learning and understanding how scholars thought about these issues. When someone deeply engages within a Madhhab, they don’t just see one view from the Madhhab but see the various perspectives within it. There is a lot of freedom that comes from exploring the multiple views within a Madhhab, which aligns with the nuanced understanding of the Hadith and incorporates specific principles that come about through such study.
And the last point you mentioned, about always memorizing Quran and Hadith, is very, very good-without a doubt. Imam al-Shafi’i also emphasized this, saying that anyone who increases their memorization or knowledge of the Sunnah gains a stronger ability to provide evidence and grows in understanding. The issue with some who focus solely on the Madhahib is that they may sometimes become distanced from the Hadith. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned this point regarding Imam al-Juwayni, noting that despite his brilliance and ability to contribute significantly to Fiqh, his limited knowledge of Hadith led him into certain mistakes, especially in Aqidah, due to this lack of connection.
Additionally, some of my teachers have recommended a regular regimen of reading the Quran daily. Most students know the importance of this along with memorization and reading the Sunnah. I’ve spoken in another video on how to approach reading the Sunnah. Without a doubt, this should always be paired with one’s study of Fiqh. If someone combines both Fiqh and Sunnah, this is excellent. But if they leave out the Sunnah and study only Fiqh, it can lead to significant issues.
@@DaudBurke
the real problem is not tassub ( firm adherence to a madhab). That is merely result of the real problem, which is replacing the ilm of wahi (Quran and Sunnah) with saying and understanding of specific group of scholars.
If students start with the Quran and Sunnah, memorizing portions of them, then progress through the Kutub as-Sitta, gaining insight into which hadith are sahih and da'if, they can then use the books of the madhhabs as tools to understand scholarly rulings. This approach allows them to discern which madhhab relies on sahih hadith and which may rely on da'if, or know that which madhab has based their ruling on saheeh hadith and which based on a usul due to lack of finding hadith, so they can respectfully set aside a madhhab’s stance when it conflicts with authentic evidence, thus avoiding ta'assub.
The main concern we are highlighting is the methodology of seeking knowledge. We argue that the Quran and Sunnah should be given their rightful positions within the curriculum, while the statements of people should be accorded their appropriate, secondary place.
@@afnankhan5989 The problem that you mentioned is literally the definition of ta'assub tho 😭isn't ta'assub blindly following and adhering to the statement of a person JUST because they said it? And that wasn't the point that brother Daud is even trying to make. The issue is your conflating the methodology of studying fiqh through a structure so that a person has a basis to worship Allah, for example, when a person reads the 1st of 2nd recommended book that MadhHabs mention to study. The problem is when people stop just there and cling to the matn, not looking into the evidences for these rulings and how they were derived. But if a person goes through the book Ar-Risaalah by Ibn Abi Zayd Al Qayrawani in the maliki fiqh, for example, and they also read an explanation like الثمر الداني which goes into the evidences for what Ibn Abi Zaid mentioned, then they aren't a muqallid and a muta'assib, nore are they replacing the ilm of wahi with the sayings of a single groups of scholars. They have a starting point upon which they worship Allah, knowing the authentic evidences from the Quran and Sunnah from which said opinions are derived. But if a person picks up العمدة في الأحكام or بلوغ المرام, they won't be sufficed to understand the rulings of all situations. Not only would they have to go through longer books like اللؤلؤ والمرجان and the كتب الستة but they would have to go through multiple fiqh focused books, like san'aanis subul and some of shawkani's books, and it'll take all the way till they get to نيل الأوطار or another longer book in fiqh before they have that basis which they wouldve reached in the 4 or 5 madhHab books while simmultaniously exposing themselves to the evidences. And these matters aren't contradictory. A brother will talk about someone for putting their hands below the navel and you ask them why and they'll say they read it in صفة الصلاة by al-Albani may Allah have mercy upon him. I personally am all for the ahle-hadees, hadith-first way if they could agree to two things; 1) there's nothing wrong with studying fiqh based on the madhHab as long as a person gives the evidences their due right (by researching them and knowing the evidences for their stances) and 2) there isn't a blind hatred against a madhHab or a position held by a madhHab because of the statement of a La-MadhHabi scholar.