36 - The religion reformer says,

"People are of two categories: learned people and ordinary people. The former ones will find out the documentary evidences and follow them. The latter ones will follow mujtahids and faqihs provided that they will not follow a certain one. Ordinary people do not have a certain madhhab. This is the meaning of the saying, 'Their madhhab is the madhhab of the Mufti.' Early scholars, again, say that it is not necessary to attach oneself to a certain Mufti. One will understand the matter by asking anyone he wishes. Ordinary people are also permitted to act upon hadiths. Imams did not disagree with one another in this respect. It is written in Al-hidaya about the fast of a person who undergoes cupping that if a person eats something after going through a cupping operation because he supposes his fast has been broken, he will perform both the qada' and the kaffara, since this supposition of his is not based upon any religious document. If the Mufti gives such a fatwa, it will be a document for him. If he has followed a hadith, the case will be the same and he will not do the kaffara (al-Kafi and al-Hamidi). Rasulullah's words would not be inferior to a Mufti's. All the four imams said, 'Leave aside our words and take the hadith.' But some people say that he who wants to act upon the Book and the Sunnat becomes a zindiq. Abu Hanifa said, 'It is not permissible for anyone who does not know my documentary evidences to issue fatwa according to my ijtihad.' Thus, he told that he did not employ ijtihad so that people would turn away from the Book and the Sunnat and follow his words, but his ijtihads were intended to show people how to derive rules from the Book and the Sunnat. To say, by following the words of the posterity, such as Ibn 'Abidin, that it is haram to infer rules from the Book and the Sunnat will mean to disagree with Abu Hanifa. These imitators conveyed the saying, 'A'mal should be based upon fiqh, not upon hadiths,' from other imitators. Though the book Zahiriyya writes that the saying was intended for ordinary people, it comes to mean that it is not permissible to act upon the Book and the Sunnat while there is fiqh, and it is obvious that the saying is wrong. Those who say so are ignorant and stubborn. Al-Kaidani said that the tenth of the haram actions was to raise the finger while performing salat. 'Ali al-Qari' said that this statement was sinful and that if it could not be explained away, he [al-Kaidani] would be considered as a disbeliever, for it was certain that Rasulullah raised his finger."

Yes people are of two categories. The first ones are the scholars of Islam who have reached the grade of ijtihad. The second ones are those scholars who have not reached the grade of ijtihad and ordinary people. In the statement that ordinary people will ask a Mufti about what they want to know, 'the Mufti' means 'a Mufti in their own madhhab'. Ibn 'Abidin wrote in the preface to Radd al-mukhtar on the authority of the book Hazanat ar-riwayat: "Those scholars who were able to draw meanings from ayats and hadiths were ahl ad-diraya. They were in the grade of ijtihad. It was permissible for them to act upon a marjuh (not preferred) report or a daif of which the transmitters were not trusted in) narration coming from their own imam al-madhhab, even though it might not agree with the madhhab they belonged to. When there was difficulty in doing something, they could issue a fatwa upon it for ordinary Muslims, too." As it is seen, it is always permissible for a mujtahid fi 'l-madhhab to follow an ijtihad showing an easy way in his madhhab which is permissible for an ordinary Muslim only when there is difficulty. [See the chapter on ghusl in the book Endless Bliss, IV.] Ibn 'Abidin writes again in the preface, "The ordinary Muslims do not have a madhhab and their madhhab is their Mufti's madhhab. The commentary on Tahrir of Ibn Humam writes in the explanation of this statement that following a madhhab is for a person who knows and understands what a madhhab is or who has understood the fatwas of the imams of a madhhab by reading a book of this madhhab, and that the claim of a person who is not so to be a Hanafi or a Shafi'i does not show that he belongs to either madhhab. As it is understood from this, an ordinary person's saying that he has changed his madhhab has no value; upon asking a Mufti of another madhhab he will have changed his madhhab. Ibn Humam writes in his book Fat'h al-Qadir, 'A Mufti has to be a mujtahid. A scholar who is not a mujtahid is called "naqil" (transmitter), but not a "Mufti." Those Muftis who are not mujtahids are muqallids, too. These, as well as ordinary Muslims, cannot draw correct meanings from hadiths. They, therefore, have to adapt themselves to what mujtahids understood, that is, they have to follow them. The imams did not disagree with one another in this respect."

As for cupping when one is fasting, certainly it does not break a Hanafi's fast. If he eats something thinking that his fast has been broken, qada' and kaffara will be compulsory. The one who is as ignorant as not to know that he has not broken his fast after cupping is an ordinary person. If a Hanbali Mufti says that it breaks one's fast, or if one hears a hadith stating that it does and cannot explain it away, the unbrokenness of his fast becomes uncertain and, when he eats afterwards, the kaffara will not be compulsory, for the madhhab of an ordinary Muslim is the madhhab of the Mufti whom he asks. This example is an ijtihad of al-Imam al-azam Abu Hanifa. It shows that a Hanafi has to obey the ijtihad of al-Imam al-azam. The religion reformer, by giving this example, proves that he is not right. Ibn Humam explains the phrase "depending on a religious proof" in Al-hidaya as "likening to one of the things that break a fast." This explanation and the report that the Mufti's fatwa is a documentary evidence also prove that the reformer is wrong. The reformer falls into the trap that he sets for Muslims. Each imam al-madhhab's statement, "Leave my word aside, follow the hadith," was intended for his disciples, who were mujtahids, too. A mujtahid had to follow his own ijtihad.

No faqih (scholar of fiqh) has ever said, "He who wants to act upon the Book and the Sunnat will become a zindiq." These words are invented by the reformer. The true statement is, "He who wants to act upon what he understands from the Book and the Sunnat will become a zindiq," which was said by the 'ulama' of Islam and which is the truth of the matter, for, a person who has not reached the grade of ijtihad cannot deduce correct meanings from the Book or the Sunnat. Our Prophet (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said that he who would draw wrong meanings would become a kafir. Because of this great danger, even the aimmat al-madhhahib learned the meanings in the Book and the Sunnat from as-Sahabat al-kiram and employed ijtihad in accordance with these correct meanings. Dislike for these correct meanings and correct ijtihads means dislike for Islam, which makes one a zindiq. Al-Imam al-azam's saying, "It is not permissible for anyone who does not know my documentary evidences to issue fatwa according to my ijtihad," shows that Ibn 'Abidin has adopted his statement from al-Imam al-azam. It proves that Ibn 'Abidin's book is dependable and very sound. The taqlid of an imam al-madhhab does not mean to turn away from the Book and the Sunnat. It means to adapt oneself to the correct meaning deduced by the imam al-madhhab and not to attempt to draw wrong meaning from the Book and the Sunnat. The aimmat al-madhahib established methods and principles showing how to deduce meanings from the Book and the Sunnat and each of them taught them to the mujtahids in his own madhhab. Muqallids, especially the ordinary people among muqallids, like the reformer, are very far from knowing or understanding these methods and principles and from performing ijtihad. Ibn 'Abidin (rahmat-Allahi 'alaih) never said that it was haram for mujtahids to infer rules from the Book and the Sunnat, but he said that, for the ignoramuses like the reformer who have not reached the grade of ijtihad, it was haram to infer rules. Our Prophet (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) declared, "He who infers rules from the Qur'an al-karim through his own opinion becomes a kafir." Al-Imam al-azam Abu Hanifa, too, said that it was not permissible for the ignorant who are not in the grade of ijtihad to issue fatwas. The religion reformer, too, writes this fact as quoted above. Then, Hadrat Ibn 'Abidin is absolutely right. Hadrat Sayyid 'Abdulhakim-I Arwasi, al-wali al-kamil wal-mukammil, the profound alim cognizant of the four madhhabs down to their subtle particulars, said, "Of the books of fiqh in the Hanafi madhhab, Radd al-mukhtar [by Ibn 'Abidin] is the most useful and valuable one. Its every word is a proof; its every decision is a document." What else can a person who speaks ill of and slights such a basic book of Islam be, if he is not a zindiq? Ibn 'Abidin was a great alim of fiqh in the Hanafi madhhab. He took his every word, his every decision from the mujtahids who had taken them from al-Imam al-azam, and, this great imam from the Book and the Sunnat. As it is seen, any Muslim who follows the rules conveyed by Ibn 'Abidin, in fact, follows the Book and the Sunnat. But he who does not want to follow Ibn 'Abidin follows not the Book or the Sunnat, but his own fancies, the desires of his nafs. The Qur'an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharif say that such a person will go to Hell. Let us say again that the statement, "It is not permissible to act upon the Book and the Sunnat while there is the fiqh," has been fabricated by religion reformers. Neither an alim nor a Muslim has said or written so. It is written in religion reformers' books only.

As for raising the finger in salat, it is explained in detail in the third volume of Ma'arif as-sunan. Giving examples from many books, the book prefers the raising of the finger. However, Hadrat al-Imam ar-Rabbani, in the 312th letter of the first volume of his Maktubat, alluded to his deep penetration into the methods and principles of madhhabs and the superiority of mujtahids, and after quoting the hadiths showing that the finger was to be raised, he listed also the valuable fatwas informing that it was haram and makruh. With strong documentary evidences, he proved that it would be more prudent not to raise the finger. In this conclusion, he depended, again, upon the hadith ash-Sharif of Rasulullah, the Master of Mankind (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam). This letter in Maktubat fully exposed to view how meticulously the imams of Islam observed the matter for adapting themselves to a hadith ash-Sharif. Hadrat Ahmad Said al-Faruqi ad-Dahlawi, one of the 'ulama' of Islam and great men of tasawwuf of India, explained fully the comments of the 'ulama' of fiqh on the raising of the finger. He wrote in his sixty-third letter, "Some 'ulama', seeing that there were many narrations about it, said that it was a sunnat. Some others, seeing that the narrations were incongruous, said that the finger should not be raised. When there are two fatwas on a matter, one may do it according to either of them. The person who does the one way should not belittle or censure those who do the other way." As it is seen, the 'ulama' of fiqh ordered Muslims to respect one anothers' madhhabs. 'Ali al-Qari's speaking ill of al-Kaidani's fiqh book is not surprising; it is written in the book Al-fawa'id al-bahiyya that he was presumptuous against even such arch-stones of Islam as al-Imam ash-Shafi'i and Imam Malik, and that he was answered in a manner he deserved by Shaikh Muhammad Miskin. 'Ali al-Qari wrote a separate booklet to accuse Rasulullah's ('alaihi 's-salam) parents of disbelief and boasted about this booklet in his commentary on Shifa', and it is obvious that the commentaries and marginalias written by him on many valuable books are not worthy of making him an authority in Islam. Being an authority in Islam requires being a mujtahid. A non-mujtahids' attempting to judge the great personages of Islam means to overflow the measures of decency.

Ahmad Rida Khan al-Barilawi (d. India, 1340/1921) wrote: "'Ali al-Qari' denied in his book Minah ar-rawd that Rasulullah's (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) blessed mother and father died as believers and said, 'To refute it, I wrote a separate booklet. In this booklet, showing proofs from the Book, the Sunnat, qiyas and ijma' al-Umma, I refuted what al-Imam as-Suyuti wrote in his three booklets.' Al-Imam as-Suyuti (rahmat-Allahi 'alaih) wrote six booklets to prove that Rasulullah's (sall-Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam) blessed parents died as believers. This is not a subject of fiqh, that is, it is not a teaching that can be included in afal al-mukallafin and defined as halal, haram, sahih or fasid. Therefore, there is not any qiyas or ijma' about it. The disagreement between the 'ulama' on this matter is obvious. The great alim of Islam al-Imam as-Suyuti was thoroughly right. It is also surprising that 'Ali al-Qari' said he had shown proofs from the Book. The Qur'an al-karim does not mention it, neither openly nor figuratively. Furthermore, for pointing out any similarity between such matters and the things that were the causes of the descent of some ayats, one has to document it with hadiths. Al-Imam as-Suyuti was such a profound alim of Islam that he can never be compared to 'Ali al-Qari' and the like. He was much more gifted in distinguishing hadiths from one another and in knowing their 'illa, regal and ahwal than 'Ali al-Qari' and the like, who had no other way than keeping quiet or surrendering to his writings. This great imam documented his writings with overwhelming and silencing evidences. If mountains understood the soundness of his documentation, they would melt." [Al-mustanat al-mu'tamad. The author, Ahmad Rida Khan al-Barilawi, as an 'alim in the Hanafi madhhab, shows that 'Ali al-Qari' (d. Mecca, 1014/1606), who was also a Hanafi, was wrong and had no authority in Islam, and defends and praises al-Imam as-Suyuti, who belonged to the Shafi'i madhhab. The 'ulama' of Islam have always done the same and defended the right, paying no attention to the difference of madhhabs. The upstart reformers, however, attack on the Ahl as-Sunna by attributing the groundless stories in the books of their la-madhhabi friends and the slanders in the books of the enemies of the Ahl as-Sunna to Ahl as-Sunna. And, with the view of blemishing the scholars of fiqh and the most valuable books of the madhhabs, Rashid Rida calls on such a person as 'Ali al-Qari', who was as excessive as to say "disbelievers¯ about the blessed parents of our master Rasulullah (sall-Allaahu 'alaihi wa sallam), as a witness for himself.]