37 - The religion reformer, at the beginning of the Eleventh Dialogue, writes on behalf of the preacher:

"We were prohibited from looking at and acting upon what we would see in any books other than the books of the scholars of our own madhhab. In fact, we were told that those writings of Kamal Ibn Humam, who was a mujtahidi fi 'l-madhhab, which disagreed with the rules of the madhhab, were not to be acted upon even if they would be based upon sound evidences."

It is ever possible that a preacher of Islam would say such absurd and mendacious things? But the religion reformer becomes so furious, so vindictive when attacking Ahl as-Sunnat that he overflows not only beyond knowledge and decency but also beyond reason and becomes unconscious with rage. Here, he touches upon one of the subtle matters of 'ilm al-usul al-fiqh, which could be explained briefly as follows: There have been seven grades for the fuqaha' (scholars of fiqh) of the four madhhabs. The first grade belonged to mujtahidi fi 'sh-shar'. In this grade were the four aimmat al-madhhahib. They established the methods (usul) and principles (qawa'id) of their own madhhabs. In the second grade were the mujtahidi fi 'l-madhhab, the mujtahids belonging to a madhhab, such as the mujtahids among al-Imam al-azam's disciples, who deduced rules from documents by following the principles set by him. In the third grade were the scholars called mujtahidi fi 'l-masa'il, who deduced the rules for the matters that had not been mentioned by the imam al-madhhab and his disciples. They could not disagree with them. The 'ulama' such as at-Tahawi, Abu 'l-Hasan al-Karkhi, Shams al-aimma al-Halwani, Shams al-aimma as-Sarahsi and Qadi Khan were in this grade. In the fourth grade were the Ashab at-takhrij, who were not mujtahids. They explained the brief statements and unclear rules of the mujtahids. Ar-Razi was one of them. In the fifth grade were the Ashab at-tarjih, who classified the narrations in the order of their soundness. So were al-Quduri and al-Marghinani, the author of Al-hidaya. In the sixth grade were the Ashab at-tamyiz, who distinguished the qawi, daif, zahir and nadir narrations from one another. The authors of the books Kanz, Mukhtar and Wiqaya were among them. Those who were in the seventh grade could not do any of these; none of them could issue a fatwa disagreeing with the madhhab unless there was urgency or difficulty.

The religion reformer distorts this and claims that it was prohibited to read or to act upon a book that did not belong to one's own madhhab. Whereas, any Muslim, like the scholars mentioned above, may read and learn the book of any madhhab he wishes. He may transfer himself to another madhhab if he wants to. When there is difficulty, that is, urgent necessity, everybody can do the easy ways (rukhsas) permitted in his own madhhab. If he cannot, he may do the easy ways in another madhhab, thus getting rid of the difficulty. However, when doing an affair in accordance with another madhhab, he has to do the commands and abstain from the prohibitions pertaining to that affair in that madhhab. For this reason, he has to have learned the points which are necessary in that madhhab. Ibn 'Abidin writes at the beginning of the third volume of Radd al-mukhtar that Ibn Humam was one of the Ashab at-tarjih. That is, contrary to what the religion reformer says, he was, let alone being a mujtahid mutlaq, not a mujtahid at all. Like any muqallid, he, too, had to follow a madhhab. The religion reformer has said before that such scholars as Ibn 'Abidin were the imitators of the imitators because they followed such muqallids as Ibn Humam. And now he attempts to blame them by saying that they did not follow them. He does not know what to do to belittle Ahl as-Sunnat! The books written by the scholars of Ahl as-Sunnat tell everything plainly. For example, the great scholar Hadrat Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Makki, in his Al-fatawal-hadithiyya, explained whether a person who follows a madhhab may follow another madhhab or not:

"Imam Abu 'l-Hasan 'Ali as-Subki (rahmat-Allahi 'alaih) says that there are seven different cases of following another madhhab: 1) If a person believes that the ijtihad of another madhhab on a certain matter is more dependable than that of his own madhhab, it is permissible for him to do that matter in accordance with that madhhab. 2) A person who cannot know which of the two imams of madhhabs is more hitting in his ijtihad on a certain matter may do that matter in accord with either of these madhhabs. If he prefers the madhhab other than his with the purpose of a religious precaution, for example, with the view of avoiding the haram, his action will be permissible without any karaha (anything disliked by the Prophet). If he has a different intention, it will be makruh. 3) Though it is permissible to follow another madhhab showing an easy way in something which one needs to do, it is wajib for him to follow one of the two imams whose documentary evidence, he believes, is stronger. 4) It is not permissible to follow another madhhab without any need and because of the desire to do the easy way without knowing which of them is stronger. If one does so, one will have obeyed not Islam but one's own desire. 5) It is not permissible to do one's affairs in accord with the collection of the rukhsas of madhhabs since it is against Islam to do so. 6) By consensus, it is not permissible to do an affair in accord with more than one madhhab if it is not sahih in one of these madhhabs. It is daif (not probable) that Kamal ibn Humam said it was permissible. 7) While the effects of something which one has done in accordance with one madhhab are still going on, one is not permitted to follow another madhhab. For example, if a person, because there is the right of shuf'a ['Shuf'a' is the right or claim of pre-emption in respect of a house or land of which one is part-owner or which adjoins one's own property. For more detail, see 39th chapter of Endless Bliss, II.] in the Hanafi madhhab, follows the Hanafi madhhab and buys his neighbor's house from the person who has bought it before, he cannot follow the Shafi'i madhhab in doing anything concerning this house."