The Diversity of Jurisprudential Schools is a Mercy

 

 

The wisdom of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, necessitated that human understandings be diverse and varied. People were not gathered upon a single understanding or a single approach. Rather, they were made into nations and tribes so that they may know one another. Allah the Almighty said: "O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise (each other). "(Al-Hujurat, 13). He also said, " If thy Lord had so willed, He could have made mankind one people: but they will not cease to dispute. Except those on whom thy Lord hath bestowed His Mercy: and for this did He create them: and the Word of thy Lord shall be fulfilled: "I will fill Hell with jinns and men all together." (Hud, 118-119). Some commentators of Quran have stated that the letter "lam" in this context is the "lam of the result," indicating that they were created to differ.

 

One of the blessings bestowed upon us by Allah is that the majority of the texts of Sharia, the Noble Quran and the purified Sunnah, are open to interpretation and allow Muslim scholars to derive rulings from them. Not being gathered upon a single understanding or saying led to the emergence of multiple jurisprudential schools based on precise scientific principles in dealing with these texts. Accordingly, their consensus is a decisive proof, and their differences are a wide mercy.

 

Al-Hafiz Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali said, "The wisdom of Allah, may He be glorified, necessitated that religion be regulated and preserved by appointing leaders from among ahl al-hadith (an Islamic school of Sunni Islam that emerged during the 2nd/3rd Islamic centuries of the Islamic era as a movement of hadith scholars who considered the Quran and authentic hadith to be the only authority in matters of law and creed) who possess knowledge, understanding, and the ability to achieve the desired goal in terms of knowledge of rulings and issuing Ftawas (legal edict) " [1].

 

There are two claims made by those who criticize the jurisprudential schools. First, sectarianism among followers of the four schools of thought. Second, the inadequacy of the four schools of thought for every time and place.

 

First: Sectarianism.

It refers to the belief of a follower that their own school of thought is the truth while considering other schools to be erroneous. They resent and argue with anyone who contradicts their school of thought. This sectarianism has been condemned by Islamic law and criticized by scholars, including followers of the four schools of thought.

 

The claim of bias towards followers of jurisprudential schools and advocating for their scholars' opinions at the expense of the truth, and the refusal to accept Sharia evidence from the opposing side, indicates a lack of fairness and limited knowledge. There is a distinction between a scholarly understanding of matters and the behavior of certain individuals in some aspects, where they only accept what they imitate. Such behaviors that have appeared throughout history have been criticized and rejected by scholars, and they are manifestations of the harmful fanaticism that has no place in religion.

 

The truth is that anyone who examines the internal workings of the schools of thought will not find this condemned sectarianism. Instead, they will find what is widely known among them: that there is no bias in religion towards any individual, even if they have reached the highest level of Ijtihad. This is one of the greatest virtues of this Ummah (Muslim community), which is that they do not leave any saying without criticizing it.

 

Here is the statement of Imam Ahmed ibn Hajar al-Haytami: "The absence of favoritism in religion, even towards the greatest of mujtahids, is the norm of our scholars who are actively engaged, as one realizes when comprehending the ultimate objective. It is encapsulated in the saying: 'This is a mistake by the sheikh.[2]' although he attained the highest level of diligence and mastery... From this perspective, some of our prominent scholars have stated that the absence of favoritism among scholars is among the greatest virtues bestowed by Allah on this nation. They left no room for anyone to interject with a statement unless they scrutinized it. They did not tolerate any distortion by those who acted inappropriately. As a result, opinions became clear, whims vanished, and the clear and radiant Sharia flourished, illuminating every horizon, healing hearts from their ailments, and securing them against the plots of envious individuals and the absurdity of skeptics." [3].

 

Second: Lack of suitability of the schools of thought for every time and place.

 The four schools of thought are great scientific schools founded on solid principles and regulations suitable for every time and place. The scholars of these schools have developed methods of Ijtihad to arrive at the Sharia rulings through specialized knowledge known as "Usul al-Fiqh" (Principles of jurisprudence). These principles include the following: the default principle is the literal meaning of the text, and it is not figuratively interpreted unless there is evidence for it, the text from the Quran and Sunnah takes precedence over analogy, a general command implies obligation, and a general prohibition implies prohibition of the matter, and so on.

 

Therefore, Ijtihad (Independent reasoning) is obligatory in every era from the time of the Companions to the present day. This is because the texts are limited, while events are limitless, necessitating the need for Ijtihad. Imam Al-Juwayni said, "Analogical reasoning is the domain of Ijtihad and it is the basis of opinion. From it, jurisprudence branches out, as well as the methodologies of the Sharia. It leads to independence in determining the details of practical matters in the absence of specific guidance. We certainly know that events, which require rulings, are endless, and our firm belief is that no incident is devoid of a ruling from Allah, the Almighty" [4].

 

The claim that adherence to a school of thought hinders intellectual thought and leads to stagnation in adapting to contemporary realities and an inability to comprehend and address emerging issues is indicative of a lack of knowledge and familiarity with the books of the jurisprudential schools. If one examines their works, they will realize the immense intellectual effort exerted by scholars of each school and their ability to engage in ijtihad and apply the principles to contemporary issues in each era.

There are numerous examples to demonstrate that the jurisprudential schools are not limited to a particular time or era but are scientific schools based on principles and regulations that are suitable for every time and place.

 

For instance, the permissibility of shortening prayers during travel when covering the distance of a "travel distance" by plane, ship, or any other modern means. Imam Al-Nawawi stated, "As for travel being considered long, it is necessary to cover a distance of forty-eight Hashimi miles, which is equivalent to sixteen farsakhs. The distance at sea is the same as on land, and even if it is covered in an instant, the shortening of prayers is permissible" [5]. This indicates that whoever covers the distance of travel, regardless of the means of transportation, such as a plane, train, or ship, even if it is instantaneous, is allowed to shorten their prayers.

 

Another example is the validity of conducting financial contracts over the phone. Sheikh Sulaiman Al-Bajirmi stated, "The second condition for the validity of a sale is that the statement is heard by the other party directly or that it reaches them immediately, or if it is carried to them by the wind and they accept it" [6]. The phrase "or if it is carried to them by the wind" indicates the validity of conducting contracts through modern communication means where the contracting parties can hear each other's words.

The third example is the permissibility of making sweets in the form of figurines. Imam Al-Shabrāmilisī, may Allah have mercy on him, stated: "The figures made from sweets for promotional purposes are not prohibited to sell or create. And I have seen Sheikh ʿAmīra mentioning this from Al-Balqīnī" [7]. This text indicates the permissibility of making sweets or cake molds and similar edible items in the form of figurines.

 

In conclusion, adhering to jurisprudential schools means adhering to Ijtihad, research, and reflection because it is not permissible for any incident to be devoid of the ruling of Allah, the Most High. Whoever examines their books will find a significant amount of research, fatwas, and contemporary issues in their respective eras. They will also understand the breadth of opinions and the respect they have for the opinions of others. Therefore, adhering to a specific school of thought establishes the foundations of jurisprudential stability and helps the recipient avoid confusion when researching legal matters. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

 

[1] Ibn Rajab, Abdul Rahman ibn Ahmad, Al-Radd 'ala Man Ittaba Ghayr al-Madhahib al-Arba'ah, Markaz Al-Murabbi, p. 26.

[2] Referring to the statement of Imam Al-Juwayni about his father Abu Muhammad, "This is a mistake."

[3] Ibn Hajar, Ahmed ibn Ali, Al-Fatawa Al-Fiqhiyyah Al-Kubra, Vol. 3, p. 33.

[4] Al-Juwayni, Abdul Malik, Al-Burhan fi Usul Al-Fiqh, Vol. 2, p. 3.

[5] Al-Nawawi, Yahya ibn Sharaf, Rawdat Al-Talibin, Vol. 1, p. 385.

[6] Al-Bajirmi, Sulaiman ibn Muhammad, Tuhfat Al-Habib 'ala Al-Khatib, Vol. 3, p. 12.

[7] Al-Shabrāmilisī, Nur Al-Din, Hashiyat Al-Shabrāmilisī 'ala Nihayat Al-Muhtaj, Vol. 3, p. 396.