عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

The Etiquette of Disagreement and the Chaos of Reality
Author : Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh
Date Added : 30-12-2025

The Etiquette of Disagreement and the Chaos of Reality

 

In the midst of the chaos currently engulfing the Muslim Ummah, we have every right to inquire about the Etiquette of Disagreement (Adab al-Ikhtilāf) and its civilizational jurisprudence within our Islamic Shariah. We observe this profound etiquette dissolving into a chaotic reality that has swept away many minds and seized the hearts of even those who are considered thinkers and scholars in the fields of Shariah and its civilizational heritage.

The Etiquette of Disagreement is an ancient and established principle in our Islamic Shariah; it is not itself a matter of dispute. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) affirmed the Companions on the day of Banu Qurayzah and did not rebuke any of them for their respective Ijtihād (Independent reasoning by an expert in Islamic Law).

Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated: "The Prophet (PBUH) said to us when he returned from the Battle of the Trench: 'None of you should pray ‘Asr except at Banu Qurayzah.' The time for ‘Asr arrived while some of them were still on the road. Some said: 'We will not pray until we reach it.' Others said: 'Rather, we will pray; that was not what was intended of us [i.e., the command was for speed, not delaying the prayer time].' When this was mentioned to the Prophet (PBUH), he did not rebuke a single one of them." (Reported by Bukhari & Muslim).

The Companions and the Righteous Predecessors (al-Salaf al-Ṣāliḥ) drank deeply from the well of this etiquette, internalizing the words of the Prophet (PBUH): "If a judge performs Ijtihad and reaches a correct decision, he has two rewards. If he strives and errs, he has one reward." (Reported by Bukhari & Muslim).They realized that the scholar who possesses the tools of Ijtihād is rewarded for his effort, whether he is correct or mistaken, so long as the intention is sincere and the goal is noble.

This demonstrates that disagreement is an inevitable reality due to various factors in matters where perceptions and understandings differ. Our Righteous Predecessors (Salaf) did not seek disagreement for its own sake; rather, the objective for all was to align with the intent of the Lawgiver (Allah). Therefore, while they may have differed on a specific ruling, they were united in their aim to reach the truth and fulfill the Divine Will.

Consequently, disagreement among the Salaf was never a cause for enmity or hatred. Their hearts were vast enough to accept and embrace these differences. Each viewed their own opinion as "correct but potentially mistaken," and the opinion of others as "mistaken but potentially correct." This diversity was not a source of weakness or division, but rather a cause for their glory and the flourishing of their intellectual thought, providing us with the immense legislative wealth that enriches the Islamic library today.

The Imams of the various schools of thought (Madhāhib) differed in far more subsidiary jurisprudential rulings than we do today, yet we never heard of "Fatwa chaos" in their time. Respect for the dissenter and a civilizational, academic approach were the prevailing norms.

• Imam al-Shāfi‘ī, upon visiting the grave of Imam Abu Ḥanīfah and praying in his mosque, did not perform the Qunūt in the Fajr prayer, even though he considered it a Sunnah. When asked why, he replied: "Out of respect for the occupant of this grave."

• Imam Aḥmad said of Imam al-Shāfi‘ī—despite differing with him on many issues: "I have not performed a prayer for forty years except that I have supplicated for al-Shāfi‘ī." When his son, Abdullah, asked what kind of man al-Shāfi‘ī was to deserve such devotion, he replied: "O my son, al-Shāfi‘ī was like the sun to the world and like health to the body; look and see, is there a replacement for these two?"

• Imam Aḥmad held that bleeding nullifies Wuḍū’ (ablution). However, when asked, "Would you pray behind a man who had undergone cupping (Ḥijāmah) and did not re-perform his ablution?" He replied: "Subḥān Allāh! How could I not pray behind [the likes of] Mālik ibn Anas and Sa‘īd ibn al-Musayyib?!"

These fragments of history provide us with a blueprint for how to interact with scholars: maintaining respect, thinking well of them (Ḥusn al-Ẓann), and seeking excuses for them even when we believe they have erred.

Reflecting on this, we must ask again: Why has this etiquette vanished from contemporary Islamic discourse? The answer, we believe, lies in the chaos of the current reality and the bias toward conflicting currents and clashing ideologies. This has overwhelmed the traditional etiquette, erasing it from the minds of many, including those counted among the ranks of scholars. Disagreement has become "blameworthy" (Madhmūm), characterized by:

1. Self-admiration and vanity.

2. Thinking ill of others and rushing to accuse them.

3. Fanaticism toward specific groups, parties, or individuals, even when it contradicts Shariah evidence.

4. Failure to verify reports and basing positions on mere conjecture.

The response to a dissenting view has shifted toward insult, slander, and questioning the intentions of scholars—intentions which only Allah knows. A cursory glance at our current reality reveals terms that have no place in the literature of academic disagreement: "rabble," "scum," "dwarfs," "scholars of the Sultan," and "people of desire."

We even see those we once considered beacons of knowledge saying: "There are Muftis appointed by regimes... their job is generally to permit what the rulers want, even if it is a prohibited matter subject to consensus (Ḥarām Mujma’ ‘alayh)."

Anyone with the slightest knowledge of Shariah knows that declaring a consensus-based prohibition to be permissible is an act of disbelief (Kufr). This language of accusation and implicit Takfīr is entirely alien to the etiquette of Islamic discourse. Furthermore, we see an astonishing degree of self-praise (Tazkiyat al-nafs) coupled with the belittling of others, despite Allah’s command: "So do not claim purity for yourselves; He is most knowing of who fears Him." (An-Najm/32).

In conclusion, we do not believe there is a "Fatwa chaos" today as much as there is an intellectual and moral chaos. This turmoil has blinded minds to the etiquette of disagreement.

Knowledge is a "bond of kinship" among its people. We hoped to see robust academic refutations based on Shariah evidence, objectivity, and wisdom, far removed from the language of insults that is unbefitting of laypeople, let alone scholars and thinkers.

The Muslim is shrewd and intelligent (Kayyis Faṭin); he is not a blind follower (Imma‘ah) swayed by every passing whim or ideology. Our religious duty necessitates that we advise one another with sincerity. The authentic Islamic discourse, rooted in the language of dialogue and the etiquette of difference, is the optimal path to reach the truth. As long as the goal is one—the truth—it does not harm us if our paths differ.

As the saying goes: "Disagreement does not spoil the bond of affection." We must not let this etiquette be lost in the chaos of our time. We must rebuild the Islamic edifice and heal the rift in our society by treating the roots of this intellectual chaos, for Allah says {what means}: "And do not dispute and [thus] lose courage and [then] your strength would depart; and be patient. Indeed, Allah is with the patient." (Al-Anfāl/46).

We ask Allah to guide us all to the Straight Path and to inspire us with correctness in both word and deed.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Is it valid to perform Tarawih prayer at home?

It is Sunnah for a Muslim to perform Tarawih prayer in congregation at the mosque.
However, if a person sometimes prays it at home in congregation with their family for a valid reason, there is no harm in doing so.

The Jurisprudential Significance of the Ḥadīth: "Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr Prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking..."
"Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking: 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah, lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuḥyī wa yumītu wa huwa ʿalā kulli shayʾin qadīr' ten times — ten good deeds will be recorded for him, ten bad deeds will be erased from him, he will be raised ten levels, he will spend that day in protection from everything disliked and guarded from the devil, and no sin will be able to befall him on that day except associating partners with Allah" — does this noble ḥadīth apply to the imam, and what is meant by "extraneous speech"?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite, immediately after the final salām, the specific remembrance reported in the sunnah to be said before turning away from one's place of prayer. The imam then leaves his praying spot, and the act of "turning" is fulfilled when the imam faces the congregation — even without physically leaving his spot — by positioning his right side toward them and his left side toward the qiblah, and this applies even while he is engaged in supplication.
Al-ʿAllāmah Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Tuḥfah (Vol.2/P.105): "It is most virtuous for the imam, once he has given the salām, to rise from his place of prayer immediately afterward." He adds that an exception must be made for the remembrances that are specifically required to be recited before he turns away. He then notes, citing Sharḥ al-ʿUbāb: "Yes, an exception to this rising immediately after the salām applies to the Fajr prayer, due to the authentic report that the Prophet ﷺ, when he prayed Fajr, would remain seated until the sun rose." He further cites, from al-Khādim, the ḥadīth concerning one who recites, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer while still in the position of crossing his leg to rise: "Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah..." and the rest of the well-known ḥadīth. He comments that this makes explicit that this particular remembrance is to be recited before the worshipper turns his legs to leave, and the same applies to Maghrib and ʿAṣr, as reported in those contexts as well.
What is meant by "speech" in the relevant ḥadīth is extraneous worldly speech that is not called for after the prayer and for which there is no legitimate excuse. The remembrances reported to be recited upon concluding the prayer, however, do not fall under this category of extraneous speech, since they are themselves required by the sharīʿah.
Al-ʿAllāmah ʿAlī al-Shabrāmalsī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Nihāyah (Vol.1/P.551): "If someone greets a person with salām while he is occupied with reciting this remembrance [i.e., 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh...'], should he return the greeting — without this causing him to forfeit the promised reward, since he is engaged in an obligatory matter — or should he delay returning the greeting until he finishes, this being a legitimate excuse for the delay?" He continues: "I say: the more likely view is the former, and the prohibition on speech is to be understood as applying to extraneous speech for which there is no legitimate excuse. Based on this, should the worshipper give precedence to this remembrance ('Lā ilāha illā Allāh...') or to reciting Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ ('Qul huwa Allāhu aḥad')? This requires consideration, though it is not unlikely that the remembrance takes precedence, given that the Lawgiver urged hastening to it through his words 'while crossing his leg.' This is not considered ordinary speech, since it is not extraneous to what is required after the prayer."
Accordingly, it is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite this remembrance and to give it precedence over the other remembrances of the prayer, ensuring it is said before they move from their place. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it obligatory for someone traveling by plane in the afternoon during Ramadan to fast?

Anyone who intends to travel after dawn must begin the day fasting and continue with the intention of completing their fast, as fasting was obligatory upon them before traveling.
However, if they experience unbearable hardship after starting their journey, they are permitted to break their fast due to that hardship, not merely because of travel. In such a case, they must make up for the missed fast later.

How to pay Zakah (obligatory charity) due on articles of merchandise?

Articles of merchandise are estimated by their whole sale market price at the end of each lunar year, and (2.5%) of their value is paid as Zakah whether it (value) went up, or down compared to actual purchasing price, and whether the increase (profit) was in the article itself such as an increase in the animal`s weight, or in the prices themselves. And Allah Knows Best.

See More