*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
{ Sila lawat Laman Hizbi-Net - http://www.hizbi.net }
{ Hantarkan mesej anda ke: [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
{ Iklan barangan? Hantarkan ke [EMAIL PROTECTED] }
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
PAS : KE ARAH PEMERINTAHAN ISLAM YANG ADIL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Assalamualaikum.
Saya ingin ucapkan ribuan terima kasih atas maklumat ini kerana ia akan jadi
pengiring saya dalam berdepan dgn masalah madhhab.
Wassalamualaikum.
....................................................
>From: Sidi Shariff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: H-Net* Why Does One Have To Follow A Madhhab?
>Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:22:54 -0800 (PST)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Debate Between Muhammad Sa'id al-Buti and a Leading Salafi Teacher
>(c) Translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995
>
>[Nuh Ha Mim Keller:] I will close this answer by translating a
>conversation that took place in Damascus between Shari�a professor
>Muhammad Sa�id al-Buti, and a Salafi teacher. Buti asked him:
>
>Buti: �What is your method for understanding the rulings of Allah? Do
>you take them from the Qur�an and sunna, or from the Imams of
>ijtihad?�
>
>Salafi: �I examine the positions of the Imams and their evidences for
>them, and then take the closest of them to the evidence of the Qur�an
>and Sunna.�
>
>Buti: �You have five thousand Syrian pounds that you have saved for
>six months. You then buy merchandise and begin trading with it. When
>do you pay zakat on the merchandise, after six months, or after one
>year?�
>
>Salafi: [He thought, and said,] �Your question implies you believe
>zakat should be paid on business capital.�
>
>Buti: �I am just asking. You should answer in your own way. Here in
>front of you is a library containing books of Qur�anic exegesis,
>hadith, and the works of the mujtahid Imams.�
>
>Salafi: [He reflected for a moment, then said,] �Brother, this is
>din, and not simple matter. One could answer from the top of one�s
>head, but it would require thought, research, and study; all of which
>take time. And we have come to discuss something else.�
>
>Buti: I dropped the question and said, �All right. Is it obligatory
>for every Muslim to examine the evidences for the positions of the
>Imams, and adopt the closest of them to the Qur�an and Sunna?�
>
>Salafi: �Yes.�
>
>Buti: �This means that all people possess the same capacity for
>ijtihad that the Imams of the madhhabs have; or even greater, since
>without a doubt, anyone who can judge the positions of the Imams and
>evaluate them according to the measure of the Qur�an and sunna must
>know more than all of them.�
>
>Salafi: He said, �In reality, people are of three categories: the
>muqallid or �follower of qualified scholarship without knowing the
>primary textual evidence (of Qur�an and hadith)�; the muttabi�, or
>�follower of primary textual evidence�; and the mujtahid, or scholar
>who can deduce rulings directly from the primary textual evidence
>(ijtihad). He who compares between madhhabs and chooses the closest
>of them to the Qur�an is a muttabi�, a follower of primary textual
>evidence, which is an intermediate degree between following
>scholarship (taqlid) and deducing rulings from primary texts
>(ijtihad).�
>
>Buti: �Then what is the follower of scholarship (muqallid) obliged to
>do?�
>
>Salafi: �To follow the mujtahid he agrees with.�
>
>Buti: �Is there any difficulty in his following one of them, adhering
>to him, and not changing?�
>
>Salafi: �Yes there is. It is unlawful (haram).�
>
>Buti: �What is the proof that it is unlawful?�
>
>Salafi: �The proof is that he is obliging himself to do something
>Allah Mighty and Majestic has not obligated him to.�
>
>Buti: I said, �Which of the seven canonical readings (qira�at) do you
>recite the Qur�an in?�
>
>Salafi: �That of Hafs.�
>
>Buti: �Do you recite only in it, or in a different canonical reading
>each day.�
>
>Salafi: �No, I recite only in it.�
>
>Buti: �Why do you read only it when Allah Mighty and Majestic has not
>obliged you to do anything except to recite the Qur�an as it has been
>conveyed�with the total certainty of tawatur (being conveyed by
>witnesses so numerous at every stage of transmission that their sheer
>numbers obviate the possibility of forgery or alteration), from the
>Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace)?�
>
>Salafi: �Because I have not had a opportunity to study other
>canonical readings, or recite the Qur�an except in this way.�
>
>Buti: �But the individual who learns the fiqh of the Shafi�i
>school�he too has not been able to study other madhhabs or had the
>opportunity to understand the rules of his religion except from this
>Imam. So if you say that he must know all the ijtihads of the Imams
>so as to go by all of them, it follows that you too must learn all
>the canonical readings so as to recite in all of them. And if you
>excuse yourself because you cannot, you should excuse him also. In
>any case, what I say is: where did you get that it is obligatory for
>a follower of scholarship (muqallid) to keep changing from one
>madhhab to another, when Allah has not obliged him to? That is, just
>as he is not obliged to adhere to a particular madhhab, neither is he
>obliged to keep changing.�
>
>Salafi: �What is unlawful for him is adhering to one while believing
>that Allah has commanded him to do so.�
>
>Buti: �That is something else, and is true without a doubt and
>without any disagreement among scholars. But is there any problem
>with his following a particular mujtahid, knowing that Allah has not
>obliged him to do that?�
>
>Salafi: �There is no problem.�
>
>Buti: [Al-Khajnadi�s] al-Karras, which you teach from, contradicts
>you. It says this is unlawful, in some places actually asserting that
>someone who adheres to a particular Imam and no other is an
>unbeliever (kafir).�
>
>Salafi: He said, �Where?� and then began looking at the Karras,
>considering its texts and expressions, reflecting on the words of the
>author �Whoever follows one of them in particular in all questions is
>a blind, imitating, mistaken bigot, and is �among those who have
>divided their religion and are parties� [Qur�an 30:32]. He said, �By
>follows, he means someone who believes it legally obligatory for him
>to do so. The wording is a little incomplete.�
>
>Buti: I said, �What evidence is there that that�s what he meant? Why
>don�t you just say the author was mistaken?�
>
>Salafi: He insisted that the expression was correct, that it should
>be understood as containing an unexpressed condition [i.e. �provided
>one believes it is legally obligatory�], and he exonerated the writer
>from any mistake in it.
>
>Buti: I said, �But interpreted in this fashion, the expression does
>not address any opponent or have any significance. Not a single
>Muslim is unaware that following such and such a particular Imam is
>not legally obligatory. No Muslim does so except from his own free
>will and choice.�
>
>Salafi: �How should this be, when I hear from many common people and
>some scholars that it is legally obligatory to follow one particular
>school, and that a person may not change to another?�
>
>Buti: �Name one person from the ordinary people or scholars who said
>that to you.�
>
> He said nothing, and seemed surprised that what I said could be
>true, and kept repeating that he had thought that many people
>considered it unlawful to change from one madhhab to another.
>
>I said, �You won�t find anyone today who believes this misconception,
>though it is related from the latter times of the Ottoman period that
>they considered a Hanafi changing from his own school to another to
>be an enormity. And without a doubt, if true, this was something that
>was complete nonsense from them; a blind, hateful bigotry.�
>
> I then said, �Where did you get this distinction between the
>muqallid �follower of scholarship� and the muttabi� �follower of
>evidence�: Is there a original, lexical distinction [in the Arabic
>language], or is it merely terminological?�
>
>Salafi: �There is a lexical difference.�
>
>Buti: I brought him lexicons with which to establish the lexical
>difference between the two words, and he could not find anything. I
>then said: �Abu Bakr (Allah be well pleased with him) said to a
>desert Arab who had objected to the alotment for him agreed upon by
>the Muslims, �If the Emigrants accept, you are but followers��using
>the word "followers" (tabi�) to mean �without any prerogative to
>consider, question, or discuss.�� (Similar to this is the word of
>Allah Most High, �When those who were followed (uttubi�u) disown
>those those who followed (attaba�u) upon seeing the torment, and
>their relations are sundered� (Qur�an 2:166), which uses follow
>(ittiba�) for the most basic blind imitation).
>
>Salafi: He said, �Then let it be a technical difference: don�t I have
>a right to establish a terminological usage?�
>
>Buti: �Of course. But this term of yours does not alter the facts.
>This person you term a muttabi� (follower of scholarly evidence) will
>either be an expert in evidences and the means of textual deduction
>from them, in which case he is a mujtahid. Or, if not an expert or
>unable to deduce rulings from them, then he is muqallid (follower of
>scholarly conclusions). And if he is one of these on some questions,
>and the other on others, then he is a muqallid for some and a
>mujtahid for others. In any case, it is an either-or distinction, and
>the ruling for each is clear and plain.�
>
>Salafi: He said, �The muttabi� is someone able to distinguish between
>scholarly positions and the evidences for them, and to judge one to
>be stronger than others. This is a level different to merely
>accepting scholarly conclusions.
>
>Buti: �If you mean,� I said, �by distinguishing between positions
>differentiating them according to the strength or weakness of the
>evidence, this is the highest level of ijtihad. Are you personally
>able to do this?�
>
>Salafi: �I do so as much as I can.�
>
>Buti: �I am aware,� I said, �that you give as a fatwas that a three
>fold pronouncement of divorce on a single occasion only counts as one
>time. Did you check, before this fatwa of yours, the positions of the
>Imams and their evidences on this, then differentiate between them,
>so to give the fatwa accordingly? Now, �Uwaymir al-�Ajlani pronounced
>a three fold divorce at one time in the presence of the Prophet
>(Allah bless him and give him peace) after he had made public
>imprecation against her for adultery (li�an), saying, �If I retain
>her, O Messenger of Allah, I will have lied against her: she is
>[hereby] thrice divorced.� What do you know about this hadith and its
>relation to this question, and its bearing as evidence for the
>position of the scholarly majority [that a threefold divorce
>pronounced on a single occasion is legally finalized and binding] as
>opposed to the position of Ibn Taymiya [that a threefold divorce on a
>single occasion only counts as once]?�
>
>Salafi: �I did not know this hadith.�
>
>Buti: �Then how could you give a fatwa on this question that
>contradicts what the four madhhabs unanimously concur upon, without
>even knowing their evidence, or how strong or weak it was? Here you
>are, discarding the principle you say you have enjoined on yourself
>and mean to enjoin on us, the principle of �following scholarly
>evidence (ittiba�)� in the meaning you have terminologically
>adopted.�
>
>Salafi: �At the time I didn�t own enough books to review the
>positions of the Imams and their evidence.�
>
>Buti: �Then what made you rush into giving a fatwa contravening the
>vast majority of Muslims, when you hadn�t even seen any of their
>evidences?�
>
>Salafi: �What else could I do? I asked and I only had a limited
>amount of scholarly resources.�
>
>Buti: �You could have done what all scholars and Imams have done;
>namely, say �I didn�t know,� or told the questioner the postition of
>both the four madhhabs and the postion of those who contravene them;
>without givng a fatwa for either side. You could have done this, or
>rather, this was what was obligatory for you, especially since the
>poblem was not personally yours so as to force you to reach some
>solution or another. As for your giving a fatwa contradicting the
>consensus (ijma�) of the four Imams without knowing�by your own
>admission�their evidences, sufficing yourself with the agreement in
>your heart for the evidences of the opposition, this is the very
>utmost of the kind of bigotry you accuse us of.�
>
>Salafi: �I read the Imams� opinions in [Nayl al-awtar, by] Shawkani,
>Subul al-salam [by al-Amir al-San�ani], and Fiqh al-sunna by Sayyid
>Sabiq.�
>
>Buti: These are the books of the opponents of the four Imams on this
>question. All of them speak from one side of the question, mentioning
>the proofs that buttress their side. Would you be willing to judge
>one litigant on the basis of his words alone, and that of his
>witnesses and relatives?�
>
>Salafi: I see nothing blameworthy in what I have done. I was obliged
>to give the questioner an answer, and this was as much as I was able
>to reach with my understanding.�
>
>Buti: �You say you are a �follower of scholarly evidence (muttabi�)�
>and we should all be likewise. You have explained �following
>evidence� as reviewing the positions of all madhhabs, studying their
>evidences, and adopting the closest of them to the correct
>evidence�while in doing what you have done, you have discarded the
>principle completely. You know that the unanimous consensus of the
>four madhhabs is that a threefold pronouncement of divorce on one
>occasion counts as a three fold, finalized divorce, and you know that
>they have evidences for this that you arae unaware of, despite which
>you turn from their consensus to the opinion that your personal
>preference desires. Were you certain beforehand that the evidence of
>the four Imams deserved to be rejected?�
>
>Salafi: No; but I wasn�t aware of them, since I didn�t have any
>reference works on them.�
>
>Buti: �Then why didn�t you wait? Why rush into it, when Allah never
>obligated you to do anything of the sort? Was your not knowing the
>evidences of the scholarly majority a proof tht Ibn Taymiya was
>right? Is the bigotry you wrongly accuse us of anything besides
>this?�
>
>Salafi: �I read evidences in the books available to me that convinced
>me. Allah has not enjoined me to do more than that.�
>
>Buti: �If a Muslim sees a proof for something in a the books he
>reads, is that a sufficient reason to disregard the madhhabs that
>contradict his understanding, even if he doesn�t know their
>evidences?�
>
>Salafi: �It is sufficient.�
>
>Buti: �A young man, newly religious, without any Islamic education,
>reads the word of Allah Most High �To Allah belongs the place where
>the sun rises and where it sets: wherever you turn, there is the
>countenance of Allah. Verily, Allah is the All-encompassing, the
>All-knowing (Qur�an 2:115), and gathers from it that a Muslim may
>face any direction he wishes in his prescribed prayers, as the
>ostensive purport of the verse implies. But he has heard that the
>four Imams unanimously concur upon the necessity of his facing
>towards the Kaaba, and he knows they have evidences for it that he is
>unaware of. What should he do when he wants to pray? Should he follow
>his conviction from the evidence available to him, or follow the Imam
>who unanimously concur on the contrary of what he has understood?�
>
>Salafi: �He should follow his conviction.�
>
>Buti: �And pray towards the east for example. And his prayer would be
>legally valid?�
>
>Salafi: �Yes. He is morally responsible for following his personal
>conviction.�
>
>Buti: �What if his personal conviction leads him to believe there is
>no harm in making love to his neighbor�s wife, or to fill his belly
>with wine, or wrongfully take others� property: will all this be
>mitigated in Allah�s reckoning by �personal conviction�?
>
>Salafi: [He was silent for a moment, then said,] �Anyway, the
>examples you ask about are all fantasies that do not occur.�
>
>Buti: �They are not fantasies; how often the like of them occurs, or
>even stranger. A young man without any knowledge of Islam, its Book,
>its sunna, who happens to hear or read this verse by chance, and
>understands from it what any Arab would from its owtward purport,
>that there is no harm in someone praying facing any direction he
>wants�despite seeing people�s facing towards the Kaaba rather than
>any other direction. This is an ordinary matter, theoretically and
>practically, as long as there are those among Muslims who don�t know
>a thing about Islam. In any event, you have pronounced upon this
>example�imaginary or real�a judgement that is not imaginary, and have
>judged �personal conviction� to be the decisive criterion in any
>event. This contradicts your differentiating people into three
>groups: followers of scholars without knowing their evidence
>(muqallidin), followers of scholars� evidence (muttabi�in), and
>mujtahids.�
>
>Salafi: �Such a person is obliged to investigate. Didn�t he read any
>hadith, or any other Qur�anic verse?�
>
>Buti: He didn�t have any reference works available to him, just as
>you didn�t have any when you gave your fatwa on the question of
>[threefold] divorce. And he was unable to read anything other than
>this verse connected with facing the qibla and its obligatory
>character. Do you still insist that he must follow his personal
>conviction and disregard the Imams� consensus?�
>
>Salafi: �Yes. If he is unable to evaluate and investigate further, he
>is excused, and it is enough for him to rely on the conclusions his
>evaluation and investigation lead him to.�
>
>Buti: �I intend to publish these remarks as yours. They are
>dangerous, and strange.�
>
>Salafi: �Publish whatever you want. I�m not afraid.�
>
>Buti: �How should you be afraid of me, when you are not afraid of
>Allah Mighty and Majestic, utterly discarding by these words the word
>of Allah Mighty and Majestic [in Sura al-Nahl] �Ask those who recall
>if you know not� (Qur�an 16:43).�
>
>Salafi: �My brother,� he said, �These Imams are not divinely
>protected from error (ma�sum). As for the Quranic verse that this
>person followed [in praying any direction], it is the word of Him Who
>Is Protected from All Error, may His glory be exalted. How should he
>leave the divinely protected and attach himself to the tail of the
>non-divinely-protected?�
>
>Buti: �Good man, what is divinely protected from error is the true
>meaning that Allah intended by saying, �To Allah belongs the place
>where the sun rises and where it sets . . .��not the understanding of
>the young man who is as far as can be from knowing Islam, its
>rulings, and the nature of its Qur�an. That is to say, the comparison
>I am asking you to make is between two understandings: the
>understanding of this ignorant youth, and the understanding of the
>mujtahid Imams, neither of which is divinely protected from error,
>but one of which is rooted in ignorance and superficiality, and the
>other of which is rooted in investigation, knowledge, and accuracy.�
>
>
>Salafi: �Allah does not make him responsible for more than his effort
>can do.�
>
>Buti: �Then answer me this question. A man has a child who suffers
>from some infections, and is under the care of all the doctors in
>town, who agree he should have a certain medicine, and warn his
>father against giving him an injection of penicillin, and that if he
>does, he will be exposing the child�s life to destruction. Now, the
>father knows from having read a medical publication that penicillin
>helps in cases of infection. So he relies on his own knowledge about
>it, disregards the advice of the doctors since he doesn�t know the
>proof for what they say, and employing instead his own personal
>conviction, treats the child with a penicillin injection, and
>thereafter the child dies. Should such a person be tried, and is he
>guilty of a wrong for what he did, or not?�
>
>Salafi: [He thought for a moment and then said,] �This is not the
>same as that.�
>
>Buti: �It is exactly the same. The father has heard the unanimous
>judgement of the doctors, just as the young man has heard the
>unanimous judgement of the Imams. One has followed a single text he
>read in a medical publication, the other has followed a single text
>he has read in the Book of Allah Mighty and and Majestic. This one
>has gone by personal conviction, and so has that.�
>
>Salafi: �Brother, the Qur�an is light. Light. In its clarity as
>evidence, is light like any other words?�
>
>Buti: �And the light of the Qur�an is reflected by anyone who looks
>into it or recites it, such that he understands it as light, as Allah
>meant it? Then what is the difference between those who recall
>[Qur�an 16:43] and anyone else, as long as all partake of this light?
>Rather, the two above examples are comparable, there is no difference
>between them at all; you must answer me: does the person
>investigating�in each of the two examples�follow his personal
>conviction, or does he follow and imitate specialists?�
>
>Salafi: �Personal conviction is the basis.�
>
>Buti: �He used personal conviction, and it resulted in the death of
>the child. Does this entail any responsibility, moral or legal?�
>
>Salafi: �It doesn�t entail any responsibility at all.�
>
>Buti: I said, �Then let us end the investigation and discussion on
>this last remark of yours, since it closes the way to any common
>ground between you and me on which we can base a discussion. It is
>sufficient that with this bizarre answer of yours, you have departed
>from the consensus of the entire Islamic religion. By Allah, there is
>no meaning on the face of the earth for disgusting bigotry if it is
>not what you people have� (al-Lamadhhabiyya (b01), 99�108).
>
>Buti concludes the story by saying:
>
>I do not know then, why these people don�t just let us be, to use our
>own �personal conviction� that someone ignorant of the rules of
>religion and the proofs for them must adhere to one of the mujtahid
>Imams, imitating him because of the latter�s being more aware than
>himself of the Book of Allah and sunna of His messenger. Whatever the
>mistake in this opinion in their view let it be given the general
>amnesty of �personal conviction.� like the example of him who turns
>his back to the qibla and is his prayer is valid, or him who kills a
>child and the killing is �ijtihad� and �medical treatment� (ibid.
>108).
>
>wassallam.
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
>http://im.yahoo.com
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
> ( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
> ( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
> ( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
> ( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>Pengirim: Sidi Shariff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
( Melanggan ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body : SUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Berhenti ? To : [EMAIL PROTECTED] pada body: UNSUBSCRIBE HIZB)
( Segala pendapat yang dikemukakan tidak menggambarkan )
( pandangan rasmi & bukan tanggungjawab HIZBI-Net )
( Bermasalah? Sila hubungi [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pengirim: "Tad deBoar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
