View Single Post
  #7  
Old October 4, 2007, 06:22 PM
BanCricFan's Avatar
BanCricFan BanCricFan is offline
Cricket Guru
 
Join Date: April 29, 2005
Favorite Player: Taskin, Rubel, Abul
Posts: 10,731

Quote:
Originally Posted by cluster11
1) This article is obviously geared toward Sunni Muslims. But while promoting the virtues of the Madhab I noticed the writer takes a biased approach toward other sects of Islam and puts them in a very negative light.

2) While I don't dispute the large background of scholarly expertise being put here to bolster the article, I'll have to say the assumption that average muslims are not expert enough to interpret and understand the ways of Islam is not very logical. For example, the first scholars or proponent of the current Madhab had to interpret and formulate their school of thought from the Quran and other sources. If that is so then how can they claim to be the absolute authority of the Madhab and that a future generation will not be able to improve upon it?.
Cluster11,

Thanks for raising these Qs. Firstly, I dont think the article or the learned writer puts the sects such as Shi'i, Kharajites or Isma'eelis in a negative light but a fair scholarly historical criticism from "Ahlus sunnah wa al-jama'ah" (Sunni) perspective. You will find overwhelmingly the majority of Sunni theologians, jurists and historians shares the same opinion. Sunni muslims makes up around 90% of the global muslim population and obviously has a few very good reasons for being the majority body. Interestingly, even with the decline of the Caliphate the number of Sunni muslims hasn't dwindled. You will find approximately 99% of the muslim converts both in the West and in the East choosing Sunni school over any other schools.

Secondly, you will not find any layperson (average man) interpreting international laws or delving into human genome research without a proper training or qualifications. Why the same shouldn't apply in interpreting Islamic jurisprudence which is as complexed and profound as those examples? The door of "Ijtihad" or Independent Reasoning in Islam is never closed. On the contrary, it is encouraged and a collective duty (Fardul Kifayyah). Having said that, like any other areas of expertise, it requires qualifications, has conditions and there are prerequisites:
(a) mastery of the Arabic language, to minimise the possibility of misinterpreting Revelation on purely linguistic grounds;
(b) a profound knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah and the circumstances surrounding the revelation of each verse and hadith, together with a full knowledge of the Quranic and hadith commentaries, and a control of all the interpretative techniques discussed above;
(c) knowledge of the specialised disciplines of hadith, such as the assessment of narrators and of the matn [text];
(d) knowledge of the views of the Companions, Followers and the great imams, and of the positions and reasoning expounded in the textbooks of fiqh, combined with the knowledge of cases where a consensus (ijma) has been reached;
(e) knowledge of the science of juridical analogy (qiyas), its types and conditions;
(f) knowledge of ones own society and of public interest (maslahah);
(g) knowing the general objectives (maqasid) of the Shariah; (h) a high degree of intelligence and personal piety, combined with the Islamic virtues of compassion, courtesy, and modesty.
Anyone who possess the above prerequisites are welcome and required to interpret the Shariah. In fact, they are not allowed to simply follow (Taqlid) the verdicts of other masters of Islamic jurisprudence.

Classical Ulama/Imams (scholars) were men of profound erudition, knowledge, insight, piety and encyclopedic minds. On one hand, they realized the intelectual activities pertaining to the Islamic Sciences (Usul, Fiqh) must not stagnate. On the other, they also realized the need to safeguard the Shariah from innovation (bid'ah) and distortion (tahlif). Hence, the rigorous condtions to Ijtihad so that no compromise is made in the standard of scholarship.
The challenge has been thrown at us. Are we ready to take it up?
Reply With Quote