The Sahaba and Tabi'een did not follow the four madhahib so why is it obligatory for scholars to do so? It makes more sense to take the good from each Imam (as a scholar not a layman). Ibn Taymiyyah said: "Statements of every individual are taken and left, except the Messenger of Allaah SAW"
A. They both followed Mathaahib. Out of 100,000 companions, only 110 gave a fatwa in their life. Out of those, only 7 were the Muftis, their Mathaahib were recognized by all the companions.
In the Tabi‘een era, they grew these 7 mathaahib into 22. 10 of them were in Madina, 4 in Mecca, 4 in Kufa and 4 in Basra. Those eventually merged and settled into what became those four we have until today.
Thousands of scholars of the Ummah have worked in collaboration to revise, improve and critically feedback these mathaahib until they became what they are today.
B. Ibn taymiyyah said the exact opposite of this actually. He said: commenting on the statement of Imam Malik "every person can be ˹partially˺ benefited from or let go, except the Prophet" ibn taymiyyah said: "it certainly does not mean that every statement of every scholar can be taken or neglected."
I teach an entire course on this at Siraj, so it's futile to try to explain it to you in a few paragraphs. Nevertheless, to claim that the companions didn't have mathaahib is a statement that could come from a person who has no idea about the history of Islam, Fiqh or Usūl.
In the Tabi‘een era, they grew these 7 mathaahib into 22. 10 of them were in Madina, 4 in Mecca, 4 in Kufa and 4 in Basra. Those eventually merged and settled into what became those four we have until today.
Thousands of scholars of the Ummah have worked in collaboration to revise, improve and critically feedback these mathaahib until they became what they are today.
B. Ibn taymiyyah said the exact opposite of this actually. He said: commenting on the statement of Imam Malik "every person can be ˹partially˺ benefited from or let go, except the Prophet" ibn taymiyyah said: "it certainly does not mean that every statement of every scholar can be taken or neglected."
I teach an entire course on this at Siraj, so it's futile to try to explain it to you in a few paragraphs. Nevertheless, to claim that the companions didn't have mathaahib is a statement that could come from a person who has no idea about the history of Islam, Fiqh or Usūl.
Liked by:
- ยัยแว่น -
+3 answers in: “What is the ruling on not ascribing oneself to a Madhab?”
