Mahfuz Ahmad
The Muslim ummah (nation) is facing many problems today. During these testing times, we must remain united on our Islamic roots. We shouldn’t argue over small matters and cause further division among ourselves. Remember, we should be tolerant and accept differing views on substantive matters (fiqh) that arise amongst us.
Such kind of ikhtalāf (differences of opinions on the substantive matter of law) had occurred during the lifetime of the ṣaḥābah (companions of the prophet) in the presence of the Prophet (ﷺ). Sayyidnā Ibn ‘Umar (R.A) reported that when the Prophet (ﷺ) returned from the battle of Al-Aḥzāb (The confederates), he said to us, “None should offer the ‘Asr prayer but at Banī Quraiẓah.” The ‘Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way. Some of them decided not to offer the Ṣalāt but at Banī Quraiẓah while others decided to offer the Ṣalāt on the spot, and said that the intention of the Prophet (ﷺ) was not what the former party had understood. And when that was told to the Prophet (ﷺ) he did not blame any of them. (Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī: 3893, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim: 1770)
What lesson can we take from this ḥadīth? The companions themselves differed among each other on how best to implement the sunnah. This teaches us that there have been various methods in how the Sunnah was understood and implemented. If we understand this important principle, we will accept the differences amongst ourselves, and become more tolerant towards each other. I would like to share the story of Imām Mālik (R.A) with you to demonstrate this point. When he compiled the great book of ḥadīth, Muwaṭṭa Mālik, Khalīfah Manṣūr requested him. He said, “if you give me permission, I’ll send a letter to all of my governors across the Muslim world so that they and their people should follow the ahadith of this book.” However, Imām Mālik (R.A) rejected this request and he explained the reason for his rejection. He said that the Prophet (ﷺ) sent his companions into different areas of the world to invite people towards Islam; thus, as they went to different areas, each community followed the methods and teachings of certain ṣaḥābah. If you compel them to follow only these ahadith, which I compiled, it will be difficult for them. It will misguide them, divide them, and cause arguments amongst them. Leave them and allow them to follow what they are already following. This story has been narrated in several authentic books, such as At-Ṭabaqātul Kubrā by Imām Ibn Sa‘ad (P. 440-441) and Majmū‘ul Fatāwa by Imām Ibn Taymiyyah (V. 30, P. 79)
We should think about our current situation, and take lessons from these stories. We should not argue and reprimand each other because of our differences in following the sunnah. Rather, we should be united upon our fundamental belief of tawhid. We should have respect for the scholars of our tradition, and each other. We should realise that we are all striving to implement the sunnah as best we can.
When some brothers and sisters come back from ḥajj or ‘umrah, they ask me, or other ‘ulamā’: “Why are there differences between our prayers and the prayers of the Arab people?” They seem to be confused about what they should follow.
Before we understand the answer, we must remember the ḥadīth of Banī Quraiẓah, which is mentioned above. Additionally, we must also remember the story of Imām Mālik with Khalīfah Manṣūr that is also mentioned above. We cannot force all Muslims around the world to follow the selected aḥādīth of one specific book.
Thereafter, we need to understand the following points:
First of all, there is no virtue of an Arab over a Non-Arab or vice versa. As the prophet (ﷺ) said in his last sermon of ḥajjatul widā: “O people, your Lord is one and your father Ādam is one. There is no virtue of an Arab over a foreigner, nor a foreigner over an Arab, and neither white skin over black skin nor black skin over white skin, except by righteousness. Have I not delivered the message?” (Musnad Aḥmad: 22978, Ṣaḥīḥ). The prophet also had non-Arab companions, like Salmān al-Fārisī (R.A) and Ṣuhayb al-Rūmī (R.A).
Secondly, if we look at the books of aḥādīth, which are accepted by the Muslim ummah, especially the 6 famous books of ḥadīth, all of these have been compiled by the Non-Arab ‘ulamāh. For example, Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī was compiled by Imam Al-Bukhārī (R.A) who was born and brought up in Bukhāra which is in Uzbekistan; Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim was compiled by Imām Muslim (R.A) who was from Nayshapūr, which is in Iran; Sunan At-Tirmidhī was compiled by Abū ‘Īsā At-Tirmidī (R.A) who was from Tirmīdh, which is in Uzbekistan; Sunan An-Nasā’ī was compiled by Imām An-Nasā’ī (R.A) who was Nasā, which is in Turkmenistān; Sunan Abū Dāwūd was compiled by Imam Abū Dāwūd (R.A), who was from Sijistān which is on the border region of eastern Iran and southwestern Afghanistan; Sunan Ibn Mājah was compiled by Imam Ibn Mājah (R.A) who was from Qazwīn, which is a city of Iran.
Thirdly, I hope you have realised that not every muṣallī in Makkah and Madina pray the same way. Some people tie their hands and some people do not. Some people raise their hands every time they get up and go down in prayer, and some people do not. So, my dear readers, these are not issues as long as we are trying to follow the sunnah of the prophet (ﷺ) and as long as we are all unanimous on uṣūl-al-dīn, and the farāi’dh. These kinds of differences in substantive law (fiqh) have been happening from the beginning till now, and the muḥaqqiq scholars did not view this as a concerning issue.
Finally, there is no intention to undermine the Arab scholars here; however, I hope this has clarified the positive diversity in our ummah and I intend that we must remain united during these testing times. We must not be divided more than we already are because of these small, furū’ī matters.
How can we recognise true scholars?
As mentioned previously, we must take our deen from true scholars. The question is: how can we recognise a true scholar?
Unfortunately, the widespread use of social media has created a celebrity Sheikh culture. A scholar according to people is the one with the biggest social media presence or the ‘right’ garment. However, my dear readers, these are not the signs of a true scholar. I would like to mention how the scholars of our tradition depicted a true scholar.
Firstly, to be a scholar, one must have spent a dedicated time to learn religious knowledge from other pious scholars. Look at ṣaḥābī ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar (R.A); it has been narrated in Muwaṭṭa Mālik that it took eight years for him to learn Ṣūrat al-Baqarah. If you look back at the stories of our pious scholars, you will most certainly find that every single one of them spent at least ten to twenty years travelling from one place to another to meet the scholars and learn from them. Sadly, in today’s time, a person spends a few hours or days attending weekend classes, registering for short courses. listening to, or watching some online lectures, and declare themselves as a well-learned scholar. Sacred knowledge has been reduced to bite-sized social media posts. People expect sacred knowledge to be served to them, rather than striving for it.
Secondly, a true scholar is religiously committed; they have a good attitude and display excellent akhlaq because they realise the weighty responsibility of being a successor to prophets. It has been narrated by Abū Dardā’ (R.A): The learned are the successors of the Prophets, and the Prophets leave neither dinar nor dirham, leaving only knowledge, and he who takes it takes an abundant portion. (Sunan Abī Dāwūd: 3641). Allah (ﷻ) said: “Only those fear Allah, from among His servants, who have knowledge.” (35:28). When people learn something but do not act upon it, they have not gained true knowledge, and therefore, the person cannot be called a scholar.
Thirdly, they must be keen to follow the example of the righteous predecessors, namely, the Ṣaḥābah and Tābi‘īn, and the leading scholars. They make every effort to follow their ways, and every fatwa or word that they utter is attributed to one of the earlier leading scholars such as Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, Sufyān, al-Awzā‘ī, Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālīk, ash-Shāfi‘ī, Aḥmad, al-Ghazālī, al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd as-Salām, an-Nawawī, Ibn Kathīr, Ibn Ḥajar (R.A) and other scholars of Islam whose knowledge, devotion and sincerity are agreed upon by the Muslim ummah.
But if you find anyone in today’s time who does not refer to these scholars or show any pride in them, and does not follow their general methodology in understanding the Islamic texts, then you should realise that he is not one of those who follow (the pious predecessors in seeking truth; rather he has drifted away from their path and chose innovation (bid‘ah).
It is obligatory upon us to pursue necessary religious knowledge. It was narrated from Anas bin Mālik (R.A) that the prophet (ﷺ) said: “Seeking knowledge is a duty upon every Muslim” (Sunan Ibn Mājah: 224)
Nevertheless, in order to pursue religious knowledge, we should think about whom we are collecting from, as Muḥammad bin Sīrīn said: “Indeed this knowledge is faith, so carefully consider from whom you take your faith.” (Saḥīḥ Muslim, 1/14).
Unfortunately, we fail to appreciate the magnitude of sacred knowledge. We end up relying on random WhatsApp messages and lectures from unknown people from social media. Due to this, we think we have the audacity to refute well established scholars of our tradition; their integrity, piety and sheer genius have been attested to by hundreds of thousands of scholars throughout the generations..
When we take our deen from the scholars, we must remind ourselves about this hadith that has been narrated by Ka‘ab bin Mālik (R.A) that he heard the prophet (ﷺ) saying: “Whoever seeks knowledge to contend with the scholars, or to use it to argue with the fools, and to have people’s faces turn towards him, then he shall be admitted to the Fire.” (Jāmi’ at-Tirmidhī: 2654)
Imam A‘mash and Abū Ḥanīfah (R.A)
Finally, I would like to share a story from the life of Imam A’mash that we can take many lessons from. Imām Sulaymān ibn Mahrān al-Asadī al-A’mash (R.A) was a tābi’ and was known to be a great scholar of ḥadīth. He was born in 680 CE and met Anas ibn Mālik (R.A) and studied under the students of ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ūd (R.A). He was a pious and trustworthy muḥaddith and his aḥadīth have also been narrated in Saḥīḥ Al-Bukhārī, Saḥīḥ Muslim and other books of ḥadīth.
It has been narrated as follws,
Abū Ḥanīfah was with A‘mash who was asked about some juristic issues. A‘mash said to Abū Ḥanīfah, ‘What do you say regarding this?’ He replied and A‘mash said, ‘Where did you get this from?’ Abū Ḥanīfah said, ‘From your aḥadīth which I have narrated from you.’ He then narrated to him a number of aḥadīth along with their chains of narrations consecutively. A‘mash said to him. ‘That’s enough. What I narrated to you in a hundred days you narrated to me in an hour. I did not know you were acting on these aḥadīth. Oh community of jurists (fuqahā’), you are the physicians and we (ahlul ḥadīth) are the pharmacists. And you fellow, you have taken both.
Al-Faqīh wa’l-Mutafaqqih, Vol. 2, P. 84
Let us recall the story again in our mind and think about the lessons we can derive. I would like to summarise some lessons from this story.
First of all, being an aalim does not mean that one knows everything.
Secondly, as we realise from this story, knowing ḥadīth itself is insufficient without deep understanding of its intended meaning, and the lived-context in which it was related. Reading books of aḥadīth does not give a person the tools to answer every mas’alah, just as reading a text message does not give you immediate access to the intended meaning behind the text, of the sender.
Thirdly, Islamic knowledge has different branches; for example, ḥadīth, tafsīr, fiqh amongst many others. For each branch, you need to go to a specialised scholar of that respected field. For example, if we have questions related to tafsīr, we need to go to the mufassirūn, to ask about ḥadīth, we need to go to the muḥadithūn and to ask about dīnī masā’il, we need to go to the fuqahā’ and muftiyyīn. We must understand that fiqh is the fruit of a scholar’s lifetime of dedication in understanding Qur’ān and ḥadīth. Therefore, it is the most important subject in Islām. Unfortunately, we do not hold steadfast to this understanding. As a result, we end up going to scholars who are not specialised in the field, and who have not placed a fraction of the hardwork and dedication that the scholars of our tradition have invested. We have become so short-sighted that we choose the novice over the master of his field.
As a final point, I would like to draw your attention to the term “ahlul ḥadīth”; as used by Imām A’mash in the story. This term was used by Imām A’mash to mean those scholars who are specialised in ḥadīth and not those who are “following” ḥadīth exclusively and must realise that those who follow fiqh in reality are following Qur’ān and ḥadīth, because fiqh is the understanding of Qur’ān and ḥadīth. So it must be clear that it is incorrect to regard oneself as being amongst the ahlul ḥadīth if you are following the aḥadīth alone. It is even more upsetting that some people call themselves ahlul Qur’ān merely because they follow the Qur’ān and do not accept ḥadīth. Ironically, the method of transmission of the meanings (i.e dictionaries) they use to interpret the Qur’ān is the same for the transmission of ḥadīths. Additionally, the Qur’ān was sent through the medium of a messenger, who taught and demonstrated the meanings of the Qur’ān to its recipient, which became known as his sunnah. Ahlul ḥadīth or ahlul Qur’ān are not terms used for those who follow ḥadīth or Qur’ān but rather, for those who are specialised in these branches of Islamic sciences.
