31 - The religion reformer quotes the conversation between Hadrat al-Imam al-Ghazali and an eccentric member of the Batiniyya. He reports al-Imam al-Ghazali as having said:

"The person whom I will advise should not be attached to a heretical group, nor should he have dived into discordant subjects. In 'ibadat, dwell upon the matters on which there has been agreement. Don't deal with the discordant matters. On a discordant matter, do the prudent solution! Those ['ulama'] who did not say that it was fard said that it was mustahab. At times when it is difficult to do what is prudent employ ijtihad yourself, that is, do the way of the mujtahid that you think is superior. Follow the alim whom you have decided to be superior and more hitting in his point of view! If that exalted person hit the right way in his opinion and ijtihad or in the conclusion and decision which he deduced, there shall be two rewards, two thawabs for him. As a matter of fact, Rasulullah (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) declared that if a person employed ijtihad and hit the right way he would win two prizes, and if he erred he would win one prize. And Allahu ta'ala referred the job to those who are capable of ijtihad. The eighty-third ayat of the Surat an-Nisa' declares, 'Those who are capable of inferring conclusion from them know the matter.' Hadrat Prophet (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) explained in a hadith to Ma'adh that he liked and approved the ijtihad of those who were capable of doing it. Ma'adh ibn Jabal's saying, 'If I cannot find in the Book or the Sunnat, I judge according to my own opinion and employ ijtihad,' took place before Hadrat Prophet's (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) commanding and permitting ijtihad. Both mujtahids and those who follow them are excusable. Some of them have hit the right way, the Divine Meaning, while others have won one out of the two rewards. Since it is not known who has hit the right way, they are not obstinate for fanatical against one another. Only, each of them thinks that he has hit the right way. I admit that it is wrong for everybody to draw rules through his own opinion and qiyas. If you abandon Batinism, which you have been imitating blindly, I can teach you the knowledge in the Qur'an al-karim. Which would you prefer, learning from me or your Batini comrades?"

He adds that the preacher, upon hearing this, says,

"Now we see that al-Imam al-Ghazali admits taqlid and considers it necessary for all people."

These words of al-Imam al-Ghazali as reported by the religion reformer shows clearly that he agreed with what the 'ulama' of Ahl as-Sunnat and aimmat al-madhahib said unanimously. There is no need to explain the above-quoted words of the great imam of Ahl as-Sunnat (rahmat-Allahi 'alaihim ajmain). Our purpose, too, is to tell our brothers-in-Islam what Hadrat Imam said. Al-Imam al-Ghazali's words rebut the religion reformer's claims by the roots. They show that taqlid is compatible with Islam.

32 - The religion reformer writes in the ninth dialogue:

"I have already explained my views on how Muslims will slip out of the obscurities of discordance, the cause and microbe of the disease which they caught. My opinion is in agreement with that of the great Islamic scholar al-Imam al-Ghazali. He says that it will be enough for them [Muslims] to believe in the Qur'an al-karim only, in addition to doing what Muslims have heretofore agreed on. What harms Islam is the parting of Muslims into groups and each group's following only the imam which they prefer and those scholars who follow him, and being bigoted against those who follow other mujtahid imams. This breaking into groups may go as far as abandoning the Book and the Sunnat. I have shown more facility in these sort of matters. I have given the liable person the freedom to accept whichever point of view he wishes, provided he will not follow the desires of the nafs and he will be as cautious as he can. But, al-Imam al-Ghazali, though deeming it permissible to abandon these matters completely, puts a limit to the field of activity for those who want to follow religious practices. He almost compels them to employ ijtihad."

The religion reformer's greatest error is his confusing the breaking of Muslims into groups in itiqad with the parting of Ahl as-Sunnat into madhhabs. He speaks ill of the four madhhabs as he does of the groups of bidat and blemishes Muslims as if they have dissented from the Book and the Sunnat. All the seventy-two groups who have deviated in itiqad are certainly heretical. It was told in a hadith ash-Sharif that they will all go to Hell. But, if not hostility against Islam, what may his attacking the four aimmat al-madhahib of Ahl as-Sunnat be, who were praised in the Hadith ash-Sharif and who won Allahu ta'ala's Love and Approval because they obeyed Rasulullah ('alaihi 's-salam)? Such an enemy of Islam who appears as a man of religious ranking is called a zindiq. Our religion declares that zindiqs and munafiqs are worse and more harmful than the non-Muslims with or without a Book. The religion reformer does not feel shame for changing al-Imam al-Ghazali's words quoted in the previous article and adapting them to his own point of view. Deeming himself an alim and a mujtahid like Hadrat al-Imam al-Ghazali, he attempts to direct Islam as he wishes. He is not aware that this stupid behavior of his is worse than that of the seventy-two groups he blames.

33 - The religion reformer opposes the unanimity of the aimmat al-madhahib, too, and says:

"It is impossible to admit the claim that there has formed ijma' (unanimity) on the decision that the talfiq (unification, combination) of the madhahib was wrong. There are different opinions on this subject. How could the author of Durr al-mukhtar ever say this, which was said by none of the imams of his own madhhab, despite the fact that his own madhhab is the combination of the ijtihads of the three imams. Also, we understand from Ibn Humam that it is not true that the Hanafis do not admit talfiq. Moreover, there are quite a lot of fatwas issued in unity with more than one madhhab. One of the most well-known of them is about 'one's donating one's movables to oneself,' which has been deemed permissible by unifying the ijtihads of Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad. Ibn 'Abidin's saying that it would not be unification of the madhhabs to unify the ijtihads of the scholars belonging to the same madhhab is an arbitrary idea which a wise person could not say. No person, not even a muqallid, will admit the two contradictory opinions at the same time. I, too, admit the fact that the authors of fiqh books could not say anything from themselves, for a muqallid does not have the knowledge to enable him to assert something from himself. What he is to do is to convey somebody else's words. As a matter of fact, he conveyed this from 'Allama Qasim, who had conveyed it from Tawfiq al-hukkam. Somebody, not knowing the fact that there is disagreement on the matter and that there are various points of view, just says that there is ijma', and others convey this. It is incorrect to think that truth will always be on the side of the majority. 'No matter how heartily you wish, the majority of the people will still not believe you,' declares Sura Yusuf."

In this passage, the religion reformer clearly reveals his ignorance and the fact that he is an enemy of the Ahl as-Sunnat. His saying that the Hanafi madhhab is the unification of the ijtihads of the three imams shows that he knows nothing of 'ilm al-usul al-fiqh. The evidences which he puts forward, thinking with his short sight that they are proofs, are quite irrelevant. We shall say shortly that the methods (usul) and principles (qawa'id) of the Hanafi madhhab were established by al-Imam al-azam Abu Hanifa (rahmat-Allahi 'alaih). Imam Abu Yusuf (d. 182/798) and Imam Muhammad ash-Shaibani (d. 189/804) were al-Imam al-azam's disciples. Educating and training them for many years like hundreds of his other disciples, he enabled them to reach the grade of ijtihad. These two and many other mujtahids who were their friends measured what they had learned from their master with the methods and principles they had learned again from their master, and they gave different fatwas on the new cases they encountered. Since the fatwas of these two imams have not been unified in the Hanafi madhhab, there is no question of the talfiq of them. In the Hanafi madhhab, al-Imam al-azam's words should be acted upon. In those matters on which he has no ijtihad, Imam Abu Yusuf's ijtihad is to be acted upon. If this cannot be found, either, Imam Muhammad's ijtihad should be acted upon. Only in indispensable (darura) situations it is permissible to change this succession or to unify the two. For example, concerning the liability to sacrifice sheep during the Festival of Sacrifices ('Id al-adha), a person who cannot meet his needs and debts with the rents he gets is considered poor according to Imam Muhammad, while, according to the Shaikh'ain (al-Imam al-azam and Imam Abu Yusuf), he is considered rich. If such a person does not sacrifice a sheep or give the fitra, he will escape the sin according to Imam Muhammad. If he gives the fitra and sacrifices a sheep, he will get the thawab of a wajib according to the Shaikh'ain. He who does something which is not wajib for him will get only the thawab of a supererogatory (nafila) 'ibada, but not the thawab of a wajib. The thawab of a wajib is much greater than this. As it is seen, the difference in ijtihads is Allahu ta'ala's Mercy upon Muslims. It is not talfiq to unite the ijtihads of the imams belonging to one madhhab. It does not show that talfiq is permissible. Talfiq is to unite two or more of the four madhhabs. Also, his reference to Ibn Humam is a lie, since Ibn Humam wrote in his book Tahrir, "When imitating another madhhab, one should not do anything which is wrong according to either of the two madhhabs he is following. If a person, by following the Shafi'i madhhab, does not rub his limbs with his hands while performing a wudu' (ritual ablution), and if he touches a woman [he is/was permitted to marry with an Islamic nikah] thinking that his ritual ablution will not break with this touch according to the Maliki madhhab, the salat which he performs with this ablution will be invalid (batil) according to both madhhabs." The book Khulasat at-tahqiq puts forth these words of Ibn Humam as an evidence for proving the fact that it is not permissible to unify madhhabs. The enemy of Islam who comes forth as a man with religious duties changes Ibn Humam's words in order to deceive Muslims, and thus slanders abominably this great imam. Moreover, it was Shaikh Qasim, Ibn Humam's disciple, who wrote that talfiq was not acceptable and that there was even ijma' on it. Shaikh Qasim wrote about this ijma', which he learned from his master, Ibn Humam, in his book At-tashih, which is a commentary on Al-Quduri.

It is written also in Ad-durar that it will not be against the Hanafi madhhab for a Hanafi Mufti to issue a fatwa in accordance with the ijtihad of Imam Abu Yusuf or Imam Muhammad ash-Shaibani, since both the imams told that each of their ijtihads disagreeing with al-Imam al-azam was a report which they had heard from al-Imam al-azam. For this reason, Ibn 'Abidin wrote in the marginalia of Waqf al-manqul, "The difficulty stated in the book Naf' al-wasa'il by al-Imam at-Tarsusi and in the fatwas of 'Allama Ibn ash-Shalbi has been eradicated. It is permissible according to Imam Abu Yusuf and not permissible according to Imam Muhammad for a person to donate something to himself, while the donation of something movable is not permissible according to Imam Abu Yusuf but permissible according to Imam Muhammad. Since neither of the two imams had said that it would be permissible for a person to donate something movable to himself, the ijtihads of both imams were brought together and a fatwa was issued stating that this was also permissible. And this is the subject in relation to which at-Tarsusi wrote in his book Munyat al-Mufti as "Hukmu mulaffaq jaizun.' [The unifier's conclusion is justifiable, by which the unification of ijtihads [of mujtahids belonging to the same madhhab] is permissible, is meant.] Further, it was the unification of madhhabs which was prohibited unanimously. In my book Al-'uqud Durriyya fi tanihi 'l-Hamidiyya, I explained this thoroughly." Also, the permission to donate money by bringing together the ijtihads of Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Zufar does not show that the unification of ijtihads of different madhhabs is permissible, since both the Imams belonged to the Hanafi madhhab. By distorting these clear statements of fiqh books shamelessly without fearing Allahu ta'ala, the religion reformer attempts both to deceive the youth and to defame the most valuable fiqh books, such as Durr al-mukhtar and Radd al-mukhtar, and thus to demolish Ahl as-sunnat from within. This base scheme clearly reveals the fact that Rashid Rida is not a man of religious authority, but an enemy of Islam disguised as a man of religious authority, that is, a zindiq.

Because the scholars of fiqh did not say the rules of Islam out of their own opinions or intellects but conveyed the knowledge coming from as-Sahabat al-kiram, the reformer abases himself so far as to stigmatize the 'ulama' as ignoramuses. But the ignoramuses are these very religion reformers who do not know this knowledge or the cases to which it is to be applied and who lie. They are vulgarly ignorant. Because of their ignorance, which is peculiar to a person who is unaware of his ignorance, they think they know something, feeling no shame at spreading their mendacious and corrupt words under the name of knowledge. The hadith ash-Sharif, "Al-haya'u min al'iman," (Modesty is a branch from iman) which is written in the Sahih of Muslim, also shows the fact that the enemies of Islam do not have a sense of shame. The scholars of fiqh have written the matters on which there was ijma'a as well as the discordant ones. Those who know the deep science of fiqh will distinguish them from one another. The ignorant reformers think that the scholars of fiqh were like themselves. The Arabic saying, "Al-kalamu sifat al-mutakallim," (One's words reveal who he is) points to the inner purpose of these zindiqs.

The scholars of fiqh, according to him, have been saying that there was ijma' without knowing the matter. This exalted religion, Islam, to him, has been a plaything throughout the centuries in the hands of ignoramuses, and these zindiqs will now restore Islam on to its rails. He, too, says that the person who denies the unanimity of the 'ulama' becomes a disbeliever. If the 'ulama' of Islam did not know or find out ijma', whence will he himself find it? No need to be surprised by him: "Al-jahilu jasurun," (An ignoramus behaves daringly!) He always says what he fabricates. What else would be easier for him, while it is a mere nothing for him to write out hundreds of books full of lies and slanders like this book of his? There is no longer any need to look for the putrid prophesied in, "As Doomsday draws near, men of religious post will be more rotten, more putrid than putrefied donkey flesh," the hadith ash-Sharif of our master, the Prophet ('alaihi 's-salam), whose each word was full of wisdom; they show themselves. Their venomous, noisome smell has been spreading from Egypt to all over the whole world. May Allahu ta'ala protect our young men of religious post from being infected with these fatal disease germs! May He deign to protect us all against the evils of these parvenus! May He not separate us from the right path of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, who guided us to Rasulullah's ('alaihi 's-salam) path and who were declared to be his inheritors! If those blessed men of Allahu ta'ala had not written the books of fiqh and 'ilm al-hal, we would have perished by being clawed by these parvenu zindiqs, believing their false words. May thousands of salams and prayers be on the blessed souls of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat, who have protected us against disbelief and bidat'.

By saying that truth will not always be on the side of the majority, he denies the hadith ash-Sharif, "My umma do not agree on heresy." The scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat have held fast to ijma' and to the majority because it was commanded by Rasulullah ('alaihi 's-salam). A hadith ash-Sharif, which is written in the section "Fitan" of the Sahih of al-Bukhari, declares, "He who deviates from the community as far as a span and dies in that state will have died with the death of jahiliyya." [Ignorance or disbelief of the pre-Islamic era.] This hadith ash-Sharif explains the 114th ayat of the surat an-Nisa'. Another hadith ash-Sharif, written after the above one in the Sahih of al-Bukhari, declares, "Allahu ta'ala, to take knowledge away from you, will take away the 'ulama' who live up to their knowledge. The ignorant will remain. By answering out of their own reason those who will ask about the religion, they will cause Muslims to deviate from the right path." This hadith ash-Sharif calls attention to the harm of religion reformers who blame Ahl as-Sunnat by saying that it is imitation to convey the words of the 'ulama' and who demolish the religion from the inside with their short reasoning and empty heads. [This hadith is written more thoroughly at the beginning of the Sahih of al-Imam al-Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari, who was born in 194 (809) and passed away in Samarkand in 256 (869)] Another hadith ash-Sharif, which is quoted at the section about " 'Ilm" in the Sahih of al-Bukhari, declares, "One of the foreshadows of Doomsday is that knowledge will vanish; the ignoramuses of religion will increase in number; there will be more of those who have alcoholic drinks and who commit fornication." Religion reformers' attempts to annihilate Ahl as-Sunnat and coming forward as men of religious post reveal the fact that this hadith ash-Sharif has proved one of the miracles that would happen in the future.

34 - The religion reformer says:

"Taqlid is a result of ijtihad. It does not exist where there is no ijtihad. It is not necessary for those who have done completely all the matters that had been agreed on to do the discordant 'ibadat. They are permitted to give up all of them. Would it be conscious and judicious to follow (taqlid) someone whom one does not know? Getting a fatwa is not taqlid, but it is something like communication (naql) and narration (riwaya). The superiority looked for in a mujtahid whose opinion is to be followed or whose ijtihad is to be adopted is not like the superiority which is in question among the Caliphs or other Sahabis. That is, it is not a superiority in Allahu ta'ala's view. It is [with respect to] the strength of [his] faculty of judging, knowledge, research and insight. He who comes later may be superior. Among the imams, al-Imam ash-Shafi'i was the strongest. When I cannot find documentary evidences, I follow the madhhab whose evidences I deem superior. That is, I become both a mujtahid and a muqallid. Thus, I get rid of being solely a muqallid. Today's Muslims know neither a madhhab nor iman. Religious knowledge which the majority have is only that Allah is in heaven and that the Prophet ascended to heaven and saw Allah."

The statements of Rashid Rida are again the expression of his own opinions. Since he is not an Islamic scholar -as a matter of fact, his statements that have been quoted before have shown the kind of way he has been following- these hastily collected statements are not worth answering. Yet, as required by the proverb, "The fly is small, but it nauseates," it will be suitable to write a few words in order to protect the youth against his harm.

It is incorrect to say that taqlid does not exist in the case when there is no ijtihad; Allahu ta'ala declared, "Obey My Messenger!" and following this command, as-Sahabat al-kiram ('alaihimu 'r-ridwan) did whatever Rasulullah ('alaihi 's-salam) told them to do, and they even threw themselves into death. They did not look for any evidences or proofs. They followed him unconditionally. His commands were revealed through wahi and were not mixed with ijtihad. But in those affairs that would be done through ijtihad, as-Sahabat al-kiram employed ijtihad and told him what their ijtihads were. Sometimes their ijtihads disagreed with that of Rasulullah ('alaihi 's-salam). Then the wahi would come to confirm the correct ijtihad. Sometimes the wahi would be in agreement with the ijtihad of a Sahabi. After Rasulullah's ('alaihi 's-salam) death, as-Sahabat al-kiram did not follow one another. Hence, it was understood that it was not permissible for a mujtahid to follow another mujtahid; and a muqallid had to follow a mujtahid in all matters, but he did not have to search, find out or learn the unanimous and discordant matters among the thousands of matters. If he had had to do so, the as-Sahabat al-kiram would have commanded the Tabiin so. Compelling Muslims to do so raises difficulties for the Ummat al-Muhammadiyya. Our religion wants us not to raise difficulties, but to have ease.

In the view of the religion reformer, each Muslim shall learn and distinguish the unanimous ones and the discordant ones among thousands of matters, do the unanimous ones, go into the discordant ones carefully, look for and find out their documentary evidences and estimate the most dependable evidence, and then it will be up to his wish to do it or not. What kind of reasoning or suggestion is this? He himself writes the fact that Muslims know nothing and that they are as ignorant as to say that Allahu ta'ala is in heaven. Which is more suitable, to teach such people a madhhab, or to raise these difficulties in front of them. A wise and reasonable person, that is, a person who speaks for the sake of Allahu ta'ala and Islam, will certainly answer this immediately. But, as it has been understood from many of his words from the beginning of his book to the end, what the religion reformer intends is not to serve Muslims and Islam, but to frighten Muslims, to make them dissent from Islam and to demolish Islam from the inside. He is answerable in no way, but saying, "Shut up, you zindiq! You cannot deceive Muslims!"

According to him, in inquiring about others' opinion and asking about their ijtihad, as-Sahabat al-kiram would take into consideration their superiority in Allahu ta'ala's view, but would not look at their faculty of judging, knowledge or research. This, again, is one of his factious, destructive ideas. He attempts to blemish as-Sahabat al-kiram. He means that they did not make use of criteria or knowledge. The Four Caliphs would ask as-Sahabat al-kiram "Which of you knows this?" and would learn from the one who knew, for, all as-Sahabat al-kiram were superior in Allahu ta'ala's view. They did not ask about the difference in their superiorities, but their knowledge and opinions. So did the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat. In everything they did they followed in the footsteps of as-Sahabat al-kiram.

It is not a guilt to believe that al-Imam ash-Shafi'i was the highest of the imams. But he himself said that al-Imam al-azam Abu Hanifa was higher.[See article 43, for al-Imaam ash-Shafi'i's such comments about al-Imam al-a'zam. ]

Religion reformers, in order to demolish the four madhhabs and thus to demolish Ahl as-Sunnat, through which to demolish Islam, dwell very much upon the talfiq (unification) of the madhhabs, that is, gathering the facilities and discarding the rest. In all their books, they put forward -it can be seen from the examples which they give of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat- that the ijtihads of the three imams in the Hanafi madhhab have been unified or the ijtihads of different madhhabs have been unified when there was difficulty. We, too, say that both the cases are permissible. As explained in detail in the preceding article, the ijtihads of imams belonging to a madhhab mean the ijtihad of the imam who founded that madhhab. To unify them does not mean to go out of the imam al-madhhab's ijtihad. Religion reformers, in a clever way with their own logic, write the things that are permissible and, by putting them forward, want to have their own corrupt and destructive thoughts be accepted as faith and 'ibadat.

35 - Rashid Rida wants to clinch his ideas by repeating his assertions. He says again:

"I do not admit qiyas in 'ibadat. Every Muslim who looks at the documentary evidences and admits the opinions accordingly is a mujtahid, too. Also those scholars who were attached to madhhabs have disagreed with them in some matters. Al-Baghawi, al-Awzai and al-Ghazali disagreed with their imam though they were in the Shafi'i madhhab, and az-Zamakhshari disagreed with Abu Hanifa. After the Four Caliphs began the time of sovereign rulers; religious teachings were corrupted."

According to the religion reformer, there is no qiyas in Islam; all Muslims are mujtahids; by observing the documentary evidences of discordant matters, they will find out the correct way; in other words, they will employ qiyas! His two assertions contradict each other. If he had been able to understand the meanings of ijtihad and qiyas in the books of usul al-fiqh, he would not have fallen into this contradiction. The Egyptian religion reformer is rather strong in Arabic, his mother tongue, and he is educated to some extent. Certainly, he can easily read the books of the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat and can understand something within his own limits. But 'ilm al-usul al-fiqh is like a large ocean. Being specialized in this branch of knowledge requires having studied the eighty preliminary branches thoroughly. A person who does not know these eighty branches, and who even denies them, is ignorant in this branch, even if he were very powerful in Arabic. This is the age of specialization. Only in the field of medicine, or in physics or chemistry, many new branches of specialization are being born. A doctor specialized in internal diseases sometimes has to refer his patient to a doctor specialized in neurology, who may have to send his patient to a psychology doctor, who may have to hand over a patient of his to a psychiatrist. The specialization branches of physiotherapy are even greater. While there are these various branches of specialization in science, how could it ever be right to slight, or to go so far as to deny, the branches of specialization and their experts in the knowledge of religion, which is higher and more extensive? This should never be admissible, especially on the part of a person who speaks in the name of knowledge. It is easily understandable that the religion reformer is very ignorant in 'ilm al-usul al-fiqh. It can be of no value at all if an ignoramus speaks ill of an alim, an expert. An alim, not an ignoramus, can recognize an alim. The words of an ignoramus, whether favorable or unfavorable, will not be esteemed. An ignoramus who writes the words of scholars without understanding them and who thus fills many pages can deceive only those who are ignorant like him. While writing these lines, we do not ever claim to be authorized in this exalted branch of knowledge. We see that we are, let alone being scholars, a mere nothing in comparison to the profound knowledge of the great scholars. We deem it impertinence on our part to speak or write from ourselves on this branch of knowledge. But what else could we do, while the ignorant and the enemies of Islam have come forth and have been moving about freely? They have been competing with one another in attacking Islam. Not a hero gifted with perfection to answer them has been seen. Islam has been going away, has been collapsing. Lots of infinite thanks be to our Allahu ta'ala that we have been honored with seeing a profound scholar of Islam, an expert of this branch of knowledge, who had seen the situation long before and had been worrying about it ever since, but had been deprived of saying and writing about it. For this very great endowment of His, may thanks be to our Allahu ta'ala again! Even if every hair on our bodies began to speak, we could not fulfill one-millionth of the thanks due to this blessing of our Allahu ta'ala. Had we not heard a few facts from the treasure of hikma and marifa of that great expert in Islam, who was Hadrat Sayyid 'Abdulhakim-I Arwasi, we, let alone writing books on this sublime, very advanced and very dangerously subtle subject, could not even dare to open our mouths. But we have deemed it a duty, even a debt for ourselves to convey the leaks of knowledge from that source to our brothers-in-Islam. In order to escape the threat of the hadith ash-Sharif, "When fitna arises and bidats are spread, he who knows the truth should say it! If he does not, may he be accursed by Allahu ta'ala, by angels and by all people," we have been striving to tell our brothers-in-Islam what we heard and learned. May Allahu ta'ala bless us with writing the truth! May He bless it with influencing those who read it! May He forgive us the mistakes which we may make! May He protect the Ummat al-Muhammadiyya against the fitnas peculiar to the last days of the world!

None of the scholars following a madhhab has ever disagreed with his imam al-madhhab's usul, even if he had reached the grade of ijtihad. The scholars who promulgated the teachings of a madhhab were of various grades. Most of them were arbab at-tarjih who studied the documentary evidences of tradition coming from the imam of the madhhab closely and then preferred one of them. A tradition which was not preferred could not be said to be refused. Such traditions are acted upon when there is difficulty. The preference of one of the traditions coming from the imam does not mean to disagree with the imam. Hadrat al-Awzai, al-Baghawi and al-Ghazali, too, were mutlaq mujtahids like al-Imam ash-Shafi'i. In many matters their ijtihads were in agreement with those of al-Imam ash-Shafi'i. The ignoramuses think that they were in the Shafi'i madhhab and that they disagreed with the imam al-madhhab. As for az-Zamakhshari, let alone being a Hanafi, he did not even belong to Ahl as-Sunnat. He belonged to the Mutazila, one of the seventy-two heretical groups. Because the 'ibadat of the Mutazila resembled those of the Hanafi madhhab, the ignorant think that they were Hanafis.

Saying that the religion was altered after the Four Caliphs will astonish not only a man of religious post but also anybody who has read books; it is something which anybody, religious or irreligious, will refuse. Both the Qur'an al-karim and the hadith ash-Sharif state that religious knowledge will continue without being altered until Doomsday. A community on the right path will be continuing until Doomsday. In every hundred years, an alim to strengthen the religion will be created. It is true that the seventy-two heretical groups appeared and those with heretical beliefs have been on the increase and there are many ignoramuses or sinners also among Ahl as-Sunnat, but still there are also those who are on the right path. The right path is obvious; the religion has been keeping its same purity as it had in the first century of Islam.

The scholars of the four madhhabs have unanimously said that the hadith book Mishkat al-masAbih is a reliable, genuine one. The hadith ash-Sharif quoted in the chapter Kitab al-fitan of this book on the authority of Sawban (radi-Allahu 'anh) says, "There will come a time when a part of my umma will join polytheists. Like them, they will worship idols. There will appear liars. They will think of themselves as prophets. But, I am the last Prophet. There will come no other prophet after me. Among my umma, there will always be those who are on the correct path. Their opponents will not be able to do any harm to them until Allahu ta'ala's order comes." This hadith ash-Sharif shows that religion reformers or zindiqs will never be able to defile this blessed religion until the Last Day. Though corrupt, destructive and factious ones among Islamic books in the libraries all over the world are very many and have been increasing day by day, there are also the right ones among them. They will never be annihilated, and nobody will be able to eradicate them. They are under Allahu ta'ala's protection and preservation. good news upon those who will attain to happiness by searching for, finding and reading these books! Couplet:

"I give you the key to the treasure you want!
You may attain to it, though we have not!"