Differences of the Imams

اختلافاتِ ائمہ

Qur'anic Verses on Reasoning and Inquiry

وَالَّذِينَ جَاهَدُوا فِينَا لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا (العنكبوت ۶۹)

Allah Most High says: And those who strive for Us — We shall surely guide them to Our ways. (Al-Ankabut 69) — And those who strive in (the cause of understanding) Our commands and in comprehending them, We shall surely guide them and lead them upon their paths.

فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ (النحل ۴۳)

So ask the people of knowledge (ahl al-dhikr) if you do not know. (An-Nahl 43) — Then, if you do not have knowledge, ask the people of knowledge.

وَلَا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ ۚ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولَٰئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْئُولًا (بني اسرائيل ۳۶)

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight, and the heart — about all these one will be questioned. (Bani Isra'il / Al-Isra 36) — And do not follow that of which you have no knowledge; indeed the hearing and the sight and the heart shall all be questioned concerning it.

فَاعْتَبِرُوا يَا أُولِي الْأَبْصَارِ (الحشر ۲)

So take heed, O you who have insight (eyes to see)! (Al-Hashr 2) — O you who possess discerning hearts and seeing eyes, take a lesson! (Move from the words to their meaning; pass from the figurative to the real; derive rulings from their sources; proceed from the general to the detailed; deduce the branch from the root; and seek out the particular ruling.)

وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى الرَّسُولِ وَإِلَىٰ أُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ لَعَلِمَهُ الَّذِينَ يَسْتَنبِطُونَهُ مِنْهُمْ (النساء ۸۳)

And had they referred it to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, those of them who are able to draw conclusions would have understood it. (An-Nisa 83) — And had they referred it back to the Messenger and to those in authority among them, then those among them who are capable of deriving rulings (istinbat) would surely have known it. These are the people who can derive rulings through sound analogical reasoning (qiyas).

إِن جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوا (الحجرات ۶)

If a transgressor (fasiq) comes to you with news, then verify it. (Al-Hujurat 6) — If some transgressor brings you a report, then investigate it; do not place faith in his word without verification.

Prophetic Traditions on Ijtihad and Juristic Reasoning

عَنْ جَابِرٍ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ ﷺ : أَلَا سَأَلُوا إِذْ لَمْ يَعْلَمُوا فَإِنَّمَا شِفَاءُ الْعِيِّ السُّؤَالُ (رواه أبو داود وابن ماجه ۔ مشكوة)

Narrated by Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him): The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: 'Why did they not ask, when they did not know? Surely the cure for ignorance is to ask.' (Reported by Abu Dawud and Ibn Maja — Mishkat)

عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ قَالَ خَرَجَ رَجُلَانِ فِي سَفَرٍ فَحَضَرَتِ الصَّلَاةُ وَلَيْسَ مَعَهُمَا مَاءٌ فَتَيَمَّمَا صَعِيدًا طَيِّبًا فَصَلَّيَا ثُمَّ وَجَدَا الْمَاءَ فِي الْوَقْتِ فَأَعَادَ أَحَدُهُمَا الصَّلَاةَ وَالْوُضُوءَ وَلَمْ يُعِدِ الْآخَرُ ثُمَّ أَتَيَا رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ فَذَكَرَا ذَلِكَ لَهُ فَقَالَ لِلَّذِي لَمْ يُعِدْ : أَصَبْتَ السُّنَّةَ وَأَجْزَأَتْكَ صَلَاتُكَ ۔ وَقَالَ لِلَّذِي تَوَضَّأَ وَأَعَادَ : لَكَ الْأَجْرُ مَرَّتَيْنِ (رواه أبو داود والدارمي والنسائي)

Narrated by Abu Sa'id al-Khudri: Two men set out on a journey. The time for prayer came, and they had no water with them, so the two performed dry ablution (tayammum) with clean earth and prayed. Then, while the prayer-time still remained, they found water. One of them performed ablution and repeated the prayer; the other did not repeat it. Both then came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and recounted the matter. To the one who had not repeated his prayer, he said: 'You attained the Sunna, and your prayer suffices you.' And to the one who had made ablution and repeated, he said: 'For you is the reward twice over.'

عَنْ عَمْرِو بْنِ الْعَاصِ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ رَسُولَ اللهِ ﷺ يَقُولُ : إِذَا حَكَمَ الْحَاكِمُ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَصَابَ فَلَهُ أَجْرَانِ وَإِذَا حَكَمَ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَخْطَأَ فَلَهُ أَجْرٌ (رواه البخاري ۔ تجريد ج ۲)

Narrated from Amr ibn al-As that he heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: 'When a judge gives a ruling, exerting his utmost reasoning (ijtihad), and he is correct, he has two rewards; and when he gives a ruling, exerting his reasoning, and he errs, he has one reward.' (Reported by al-Bukhari — Tajrid, vol. 2) That is: if a ruler, after independent reasoning and his best effort, issues a ruling and it is correct, he has two rewards (one for the effort and one for arriving at the truth); and if, after the effort, the ruling is in error, he still has one reward (namely, for the ijtihad and the effort).

عَنْ عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ ﷺ لَنَا لَمَّا رَجَعَ مِنَ الْأَحْزَابِ : لَا يُصَلِّيَنَّ أَحَدٌ الْعَصْرَ إِلَّا فِي بَنِي قُرَيْظَةَ ۔ فَأَدْرَكَ بَعْضَهُمُ الْعَصْرُ فِي الطَّرِيقِ فَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ لَا نُصَلِّي حَتَّى نَأْتِيَهَا وَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ بَلْ نُصَلِّي لَمْ يُرِدْ مِنَّا ذَلِكَ فَذُكِرَ ذَلِكَ لِلنَّبِيِّ ﷺ فَلَمْ يُعَنِّفْ أَحَدًا مِنْهُمْ (رواه البخاري ۔ تجريد)

Narrated by Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with both): The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to us when he returned from (the campaign of) al-Ahzab: 'Let none of you pray the afternoon prayer (Asr) except among the Banu Qurayza.' The time of Asr overtook some of them on the way. Some of them said, 'We shall not pray until we reach it (Banu Qurayza),' while others said, 'No, we shall pray (now); he did not intend that of us (i.e., he intended only that we hasten).' This was mentioned to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he did not reproach any of them. (Reported by al-Bukhari — Tajrid) — This narrates that two groups of Companions differed: one understood the Prophet's command literally (do not pray Asr until you arrive at Banu Qurayza), while the other understood that the real aim was to reach the destination quickly. When the matter was put to the Prophet, he reproached neither group.

Commentary: The Sources of Juristic Difference

Allah Most High says: 'And those who strive for Us — We shall surely guide them to Our ways.' Whether the matter requires the investigation and verification of Qur'anic verses or of the hadiths of the Messenger — those who exert themselves in understanding will be guided.

In carrying out vague and ambiguous matters, if some course is adopted, it is not thereby wrong. One command was left (open), and different people carried it out, each according to his own discernment (tamyiz). It is not that one was upon the truth and all the rest upon falsehood, nor that one was right and all the others wrong simultaneously. Remember: one is called 'truthful (sadiq)' on a single point only when some opinion is built upon a (verifiable) event — for that which corresponds to the fact is 'truthful (sadiq),' and that which does not correspond is 'false (kadhib).' But an ambiguous matter that hinges on the exercise of discernment is not in itself an established event or thing that could be measured as corresponding or not corresponding, true or false. Where, then, is there room here for 'truthful' and 'false'? Therefore each, in his own estimation, can be sound and correct.

Some analogies (qiyas) have their source in the Qur'an and Hadith; these are sound and correct. Some have neither the Qur'an nor a hadith as their source, and are not (in themselves) hadith — these are not correct. Sometimes a certain Imam derives a ruling from the Qur'an and Hadith; another's comprehension falls short of grasping it — he thinks this is mere personal opinion (ra'y) that has no source. In reality, the (other) people's vision is not so penetrating (as the Imam's).

It is a natural matter that every person is more acquainted with the circumstances of his own teachers, his own family, and the people of his own city; he places greater trust in them and is acquainted with their detailed circumstances, whereas he neither relies upon, nor is fully acquainted with, the circumstances of others.

This too is worth considering: a person attains certainty or strong probability from a multiplicity of narrations (kathrat-e-riwayat), and he considers it important to ascertain the trustworthiness and juristic understanding (faqahat) of the second narrator.

Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) holds that the general and absolute statements (al-'amm wa'l-mutlaq) of the Qur'an convey certainty to those addressed by them, while a non-mutawatir hadith does not (independently) restrict or specify (the Qur'an). Because, in his view, the existence of an authoritative ruling (mawjiba kulliyya) cannot be qualified by a particularizing partial (qadiyya juz'iyya). To act upon the specification or restriction of the general and absolute of the Qur'an, against the Qur'an, they (the Hanafis) regard as akin to denying the Qur'an. In their view, the general statements of the Qur'an are definitive and certain. Some other Imams do not regard the general statements of the Qur'an as definitive and certain; for them, the general always carries some element of specification, and hence (a ruling derived from a single report) is presumptive (zanni). Therefore they specify and restrict the Qur'an by way of a solitary report (khabar-e-ahad), and do not consider this a violation of Hadith. They regard those who do not specify or restrict the Qur'an (by such reports) as people of mere opinion (ahl al-ra'y) and opposed to Hadith. 'And to Allah belongs the (complete) argument' (wa lillahi al-hujja).

Many of the Companions — for instance al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam (may Allah be pleased with him) — when they had memorized the exact Prophetic wording, would narrate verbatim; otherwise, they did not consider it proper to narrate by the (exact) words — that is, they would narrate the meaning (riwaya bi'l-ma'na). And very many other Companions deemed narration by meaning permissible.

The Maliki scholars would consider that if a person narrated, against the established practice of the people of Medina, a report from some other city, then it was as though he were branding all the Rightly-Guided Caliphs and the centre of prophethood — that is, Medina and its people — as ignorant. The people of the other schools deemed this permissible, on the grounds that it is possible the people of Medina were unaware (of a given report) while the people of another city had received knowledge of it.

Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and other (Companions) used to demand, for every ruling, proof of testimony in accordance with the prescribed quorum (nisab) of witnesses regarding the matter testified to — that is, no ruling would be considered established without the report of two men, or of one man and two women.

Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) held that when some Prophetic ruling was recounted before him and the quorum of testimony was not complete, he would administer an oath; and (with) the oath he considered the testimony complete.

The followers (muqallidīn) of the Imams used to be approached by the general public, who would ask them, 'What is the ruling in this matter?' The Imams had such great confidence in them that they would not ask, 'Where is the Qur'an? Where is the hadith?' Whatever ruling the Imam gave, they would act upon it. Some Imams would answer every question with 'Allah said' and 'the Messenger said' — giving the relevant verses, narrating the hadith concerning the matter, and citing the chain. Hadiths of this kind — narrated without their chains — are termed 'mursal.' In the Hanafi school, a mursal hadith is fit to be relied upon, provided it has not been narrated by an obscure chain, but rather by a trustworthy, reliable, and dependable narrator or Imam. The traditionists do not accept mursal hadith. Suspended narrations (muʿallaqāt) — citations without a complete chain — occur even in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Imam Bukhari sometimes writes a fragment of a hadith in one place but narrates the complete hadith with its chain in another place. Imam Bukhari considers a meeting between teacher and pupil to be necessary (for a sound chain), otherwise he does not accept the hadith; Imam Muslim deems it sufficient that the two were contemporaries. Some scholars accept only authentic (sahih) hadith; if it is corroborated by another hadith, they call it 'sahih li-ghayrihi (authentic by virtue of another).'

Some scholars also consider a weak (da'if) hadith fit to be acted upon in matters of the recommended (mustahabbat). Likewise, the various Imams have differing temperaments; each accepts the hadith that accords with his own disposition. There is no Imam who acts without thorough investigation and verification, whether of the Qur'anic verses or of the hadiths of the Messenger.

From the foregoing it does not follow that the Imam who acts upon a hadith opposed to (the apparent of the Qur'an) is acting against (the Qur'an itself). The essential point is this: between the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and ourselves, the narrators are of various kinds, and scrutinizing them (naqd al-rijal) is necessary. After all, how could any Muslim deliberately disobey the command of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)? To suppose that the Imams are 'opposed to Hadith' is mere idle tongue-wagging.

The Six Authentic Collections (Sihah Sitta) and the other books of Hadith are well known and widespread — Hanafi, Shafi'i, Hanbali, Maliki — all are before everyone's eyes. In following these books of Hadith, the scholars have explained their reasoning. To level the accusation against them that, despite (the existence of) the hadiths, the Imams clung to their own school out of prejudice is itself an instance of evil suspicion (su' al-zann), and 'indeed some suspicion is sin' (inna ba'd al-zann ithm).

Now reflect a little upon this as well: is the imitation (taqlid) of these four Imams a personal (blind) following, or are these four schools four collections of texts and four schools (of jurisprudence)? — within which these (juristic) issues are subjects of ongoing investigation. The proof of an authentic hadith and the change of custom ('urf), and the rise of new circumstances, change with time; for which reason the Imam's view differs. Each school has its books of jurisprudence (fiqh) and of legal theory (usul al-fiqh) — observe them: the differences with an Imam occur not only in the branches (furu') but even in the principles (usul). Nevertheless, within a single school, a certain closeness and suitability is found among the persons of that school relative to another school. For example, there is even a difference of principles between Imam Abu Hanifa and his pupils Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammad, Imam Zufar, and Imam Hasan ibn Ziyad. The scholars and the verifiers (muhaqqiqun) sometimes give a verdict (fatwa) according to the view of Imam Abu Yusuf, sometimes according to the view of Imam Muhammad, and sometimes according to the view of Imam Zufar. To regard (the use of) investigation as mere personal blind-following of some particular Imam — to suppose this — is to imagine that they do not find the authentic hadiths, and (this notion) is itself a proof of one's own ignorance.

Reflect, too: to resolve matters of the Sacred Law, how many kinds of scholars are required? For each kind of issue, what sort of information does a scholar need? Arabic literature is needed in every case. For that one needs acquaintance with lexicon, idiom, grammar (nahw), morphology (sarf), and rhetoric ('ilm al-ma'ani). One has need of the Noble Qur'an, and for that, of the principles of exegesis (usul al-tafsir). There is need of Hadith, and for that, of the principles of Hadith (usul al-hadith) and the science of the narrators (asma' al-rijal). There is need of jurisprudence, and for that, of the principles of jurisprudence (usul al-fiqh), logic (mantiq), the matters of consensus (ijma'i masa'il), and the knowledge of the differences of the Imams (ikhtilafat-e-aimma) — without which there is no way. With the passing of time, new issues arise; (one needs) acquaintance with them, the secrets and aims of religion (asrar wa maqasid al-din), custom ('urf), and the general practice of the people ('umumat al-balwa) — in short, only after knowing a great many such matters can a single ruling of the Sacred Law be determined.

Among the scholars there are some who are absolute mujtahids (mujtahid mutlaq); they are masters of independent opinion (sahib al-ra'y). Each has his own particular cast of mind, his own particular mode of ijtihad, his own particular manner of inference (istidlal).

Some are mujtahids within a school (mujtahid fi'l-madhhab); the influence of their teacher remains strong upon them. In some places these mujtahids-within-the-school hold even fundamental (usuli) differences. The mujtahid within an issue (mujtahid fi'l-mas'ala) — when some new situation arises in the branches — can give an answer for it; he reflects upon the hadiths, and when an authentic hadith is established (in his view) contrary to (the view of) his teachers, he issues a verdict against them; he points the way to correct practice.

The masters of inference (ashab al-istinbat) cannot themselves conduct personal verification (tahqiq) of the Qur'an and the hadiths, but they derive particulars from the universals (kulliyat) of their school. The 'masters of preference' (ashab-e-tarjih), in whom the faculty of discernment is weaker, give preponderance to one statement among the differing statements.

Some are called muftis (mufti); these derive particulars from the books of jurisprudence. These people are, at root, transmitters (naqil); their personal effort consists only in this much — that they search through the books to find the answer to a question and produce it. In their view, the door of fresh investigation and inference is closed. They regard any new matter as forbidden (haram) and impermissible (na-ja'iz). These are found among the Shafi'is, among the Malikis, among the Hanbalis, and among the Hanafis.

In the time of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) there was a difference of opinions among them, but they did not consider one another to be (each) in falsehood, nor (each) irreligious. The Imams, despite their mutual differences, prayed behind one another. Alas — what an age has come! Those who say 'Amin' aloud, and those who raise their hands (raf' al-yadayn), build separate mosques; the Hanafis and the Shafi'is build separate mosques. They refuse to pray behind one another; they take one another to court; and they submit to whatever judgment is rendered by non-Muslim rulers.

Once, in Baghdad Sharif, this poor one (faqir) prayed the Maghrib prayer in the Masjid Ghawthiyya. The two congregations of the Hanafis and the Hanbalis, standing arm to arm in the same row, were praying side by side at the very same time. Hearing the call of 'Allahu Akbar,' a person would be astonished: is this the voice of our Imam, or of the other Imam? Abd al-Aziz al-Su'udi appointed one Imam for one prayer of the Hanafis and one prayer of the Shafi'is, one for the Hanbalis, and one for the Malikis, and the followers of all the schools had to pray behind that same Imam.