Q. Could you please explain the status of the four schools of thought and the reasons for the major differences between them. Is it obligatory for a Muslim to strictly follow one of these schools, or could one take up verdicts and rulings from schools other than his own? Is it obligatory to follow rulings based on qiyas and ijmaa’?
M.M. Ahmad, Jeddah
A. Islam spread into wide areas shortly after the Prophet’s death. Life in these areas presented numerous situations which had no ruling in the Qur’an and the Sunnah to show the Muslims how to behave concerning them. Moreover, the passage of time presents new situations and problems, all of which need to be considered in the light of Islam, so as to determine the right Islamic conduct concerning them. This means that scholars need to come up with answers to such questions on the basis of Islamic teachings outlined in the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Muslim scholars started to do so right from the early days of Islam. The Prophet’s companions included a number of scholars who were able to deduce rulings on the basis of the Qur’an and what they heard the Prophet saying in different situations. This established a tradition of construction and deduction which allowed that a ruling is available to cater for all cases. Over a period of two or three generations, the process led to a movement toward schools of thought or schools of law in various areas. With the turn of the first century of the Islamic era, the founders of some of these schools were looking into all matters relevant to Islamic life in their generation. We find Imam Malik in Madinah and Imam Abu Haneefah in Iraq distinguished for their scholarship and having students from far and wide learning under them. A short while later, Imam El-Shafie and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal gained wide fame and reputation. A school of thought is established through a process of several generations of scholars following the same lines of deduction and construction. These scholars will also be of high caliber, able to deduce new rulings for new situations. They follow the same lines as their school and its founder. In the history of Islam, there were numerous scholars of high caliber. They continued the tradition of diligent scholarship. At the time of the founders of the four schools, there were many others who were of equal and even better caliber, and they ruled on numerous questions, but there were not many scholars over several generations to follow in their tradition. That is why they did not become associated with independent schools of thought. Otherwise their views remain valid in the questions they considered. There is no virtue in having only four schools of thought. Indeed we have many more. There is no ruling that one must follow a single school of thought. Indeed, very rarely anyone does that. A scholar who has studied these schools of thought will take rulings from each, according to suitability to different situations. If he is considering a question put to him, he will try to give the ruling which is most suitable for the person concerned, with little regard to the person’s own school of thought. That is because there is no obligation to follow any of them. Suppose a couple get married and the woman’s father or guardian is not present.
The woman acts for herself and consents to the marriage in front of witnesses. If the case is put to a scholar, he does not ask the couple which school of thought they follow. He will rule that the marriage is valid, in spite of the fact that three schools of thought do not approve of it. He will take the fourth school’s view which approves of it, because otherwise he would make the couple adulterers and their children illegitimate. An ordinary person will not realize what rulings are made on the basis of qiyas, or analogy, and ijmaa’, or unanimity of scholars. When he is told of a ruling that has been approved by scholars, he should implement it unless he has a legitimate objection to it on the basis of accurate knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah.
On prayer
Mr. Ruknuddin Abid asks whether a person offering the prayer of Dhuhr or Asr in congregation should read the Surah Al-Fatihah in every rakaah. The question of reading when one is praying in a congregation is frequently asked, and will continue to be so, because of the differences between schools of thought on this point.
It is a question in which both opposite views rely on strong evidence. Hence, I would say to everyone to continue to do what he has learned to do, or what he feels comfortable with, because both ways are acceptable.
The scholars who say that reading the Qur’an by a person praying in congregation is not necessary rely on a Hadith which says that “Whoever is praying with an imam, the reading by the imam is a reading on his behalf.” Thus all scholars subscribe to the fact that reading Al-Fatihah is obligatory in prayer. However, the difference is over whether it is adequate to be read by the imam alone, or it must be read by everyone. It is over this point that whichever view one takes is good and valid. The same ruling applies to all prayers including those in which the imam is required to read privately, without raising his voice, i.e. Dhuhr and Asr.
Arab News Islam 29 November 2002
