Disagreements between the Fiqh schools.

The nation is in dire need of flinging the door of collective (institutional) and individual ijtihad wide open unfettered but by the religious controls and boundaries Islam put for it. It is also necessary for the nation to reconsider many of the old chapters of Fiqh that need upgrading and modern ijtihad (reasoning). Many of the fiqhi issues mentioned in the old books of Fiqh and categorized as Fatawa (Religious rulings) need further reasoning to cope with the changes of times and developments and differences of the reality.

Provisional legal Fiqh (jurisprudence) has undergone tangible developments. Fiqh schools in Europe and the west have flourished. Yet, this was only at the expense of a Fiqh backwardness and legislative recess all over the Islamic and Arab countries.

Had the Muslim nation paid the ijtihad (juristic reasoning) the proper attention, and had scholars and mujtahids (in charge of juristic reasoning) played the role assigned to them; Muslims would have been taken to the forefront of all nations. And lie propagators would not have wagged their tongues saying that the Islamic Law can not catch up with the parade of progress.

ــ The Islamic Law has been ruling one hemisphere for long centuries, during which the banner of Islam was hosted in all environments and among various races. Islam, then, established contacts with all kinds of culture; and it never had a problem with the new or failed to meet a given need. Rather, Islam could find a cure for each malady and a solution to each conundrum.

* We believe in the necessity of opening the door for ijtihad (juristic reasoning): individual as well as collective (institutional) ijtihad. Yet, we believe that institutional ijtihad is much more capable of reaching the right conclusions, taking the world of reality into account and achieving the assigned goals.

Our understanding of disagreements among the Fiqh schools

In the past, the ulama of the nation did their utmost and left us a great Islamic legislative legacy no other nation has. One of the greatest manifestations of this legacy was the emergence of the now-existent Fiqh schools which were accepted by the Muslim nation. The difference and multiplicity of these schools begot all the good, welfare, prosperity and richness to the whole nation. The Fiqhi, legislative and ideological movement gave zest and zeal to the vast Islamic world enabling it to ensure the hegemony of its culture and cement its foundations.

Deploying this legislative legacy, the Islamic Jurisprudence could meet all the needs of the communities under its reign. The Islamic Law could also solve all the problems posing in the places it reigned. It could, for a measure, find the most just and the suitable solutions there could be.

That is why we, the Muslims, take pride in these Fiqhi schools. This fiqhi legislative treasure is our joy and pride. Therefore, we stand united against any attempt to cast doubt on or destroy these schools. Moreover, we renounce any call for marginalizing these schools or modifying them.

We also believe that the call for undermining the existent Fiqhi schools and invalidating them is a malignant and self-destructive one.

Our understanding of the Fiqhi subsidiary disparity

We assume that disparity among scholars and mujtahids concerning subsidiary issues and issues open for ijtihad (reasoning) involves mercy on this nation and an amplitude of choices. This incongruity also enriches the Fiqhi and ideological movement of this nation. This can be best manifested in the Fiqhi treasure left us by the Imams and Ulama: the fruit of a great deal of research,  thorough study of evidences, as well as non-stop discussions and debates.

There is no doubt that disparity among the ulama is an inevitable fact, for discrepancy is a divine and universal pattern. Differences among ulama can be ascribed to the different nature of each mind and the disparity in the ability to understand; let alone minds unequal abilities of research and ijtihad. These differences can also be attributed to the amount of knowledge minds can gain and the various ways of teaching and learning the Muslims’ minds are exposed to. Add to all this the fact that most of the religious texts are of probable meaning and they contain countless number of events and incidents. Hence, the difference in ijtihad and judgements from one scholar to another and from one mujtahid to another.

 ـThe fundamentals of Islam are stipulated in clear-cut meaning texts of the Qur'an and sunnah. There is a consensus regarding these fundamentals. It is highly important to note that these fundamentals are the common religion among all Allah’s Prophets, as says the Sheikh of Islam Ibn Taimiyya. Thus, he who disobeys them or doubts them is of those sowing the seeds of dissension and religious bad innovation.

If the Muslim scholars legal disagreement is not out of the ordinary and does not violate the Muslims' consensus, then it is a blessed mercy on Muslims.

Such juristic differences give the Muslims a multiplicity of options owing to the disparity of the level of their zeal and determination as well as their differing conditions. As denoted by Ibn Abdel Barr, this juristic difference is not allowed to follow the mitigation permissions given by the Muslin scholars, let alone their blunders and mistakes.

ـ We believe that ijtihad in subsidiary issues does not lay the basis which determines man’s loyalty to Islam or his disbelief no matter how convinced one is of any given opinion. This religion stands somewhere between the two extremes: those who permit to mitigate what is obligatory and those who show no leniency in applying what is open for reasoning.

Throughout the history of Islam, even in the era of the Prophet (PBUH), there have been juristic differences among Muslim scholars. An example of these is the Prophet's order to the soldiers to perform the Afternoon Prayer in Banu Quraidha; the Prophet did not blame those who did not abide by his order. Similarly, there has been disagreement among the nation's scholars concerning this incident. But, they never saw this disagreement to be harmful; and none of them coerced the opposing scholars to adopt his own opinion. Furthermore, none of the Muslim scholars underestimated the others' opinions or accused them of lacking the appropriate knowledge to make religious judgments. This was an incident of juristic disagreement wrapped in politeness, love and brotherhood.

The importance of the most probable in Fiqh

Based on our understanding of the juristic differences, we realize that the juristic opinions most likely to be right have a scientific, practical and realistic value. This is so long as these opinions most likely to be right are within the frame of the disagreement accepted by the Islamic Law.

The theoretically and juristically most likely right opinions are so practically and realistically. Such opinions can present solutions for the crises that may storm groups, countries and nations. These opinions can be a legal way out from calamities that can wreak havoc on these nations.

Were the Islamic Fiqh of one and only jurist opinion, the society would find no solution for serious challenges facing them. In this case, there would have been but one solution left: to encroach on the Islamic Jurisprudence altogether.

Had the Islamic Fiqh been of one and only opinion, people would have found difficulty in both Islam and life; and they would have suffered from the inconvenience and discomfort which Islam came to elevate. Allah Almighty says, "Allah intends every facility for you; He does not want to put you to difficulties" (Al baqara:185)

Out of the bounty of Allah and His Mercy on the Muslim nation; the less important the issue is, the more often the disagreement erupts and vice verse.

The pillars, fundamentals, bases and doctrine of Islam are liable to no dispute or disagreement. Dispute appears only when it comes to the subsidiary issues and issues open for ijtihad. On these issues, the Muslims can disagree among themselves as their ancestors did before them.

Between magnifying the disputable issues and engaging in the nation's serious issues

We construe that the attempt to end the juristic disagreement on the issues open to reasoning is a waste of the nation's efforts. Ending such disputes is a futile and fruitless matter. It also distracts the nation's attention away from other important topics. Thus, it is of no use whatsoever.

ـ Our ancestors failed to reach consensus concerning these juristic issues which are open to reasoning and various interpretations of probability. So all the noise and clatter over these disputes, discussing them over and over, and exaggerating the importance of these issues is indicative of a serious negative attitude that should be abandoned by those working for the religion of Allah.

This magnification and fanaticism are the factors of destruction not construction: they lead to dissension, not unity. This comes at a time the Muslim nation is in dire need of someone to unite it and raise it from its fall. It follows that the Islamic Law has to be saved from the deadlock it suffers.

ـ It is our right to have our own understanding and ijtihad in construing the religious texts. But we ought to respect the ijtihad of any scholar who did his best to reach the right conclusions as long as this ijtihad has its justifications in the Islamic Law. As Al Shafi'I said, "our opinion is a right one with the possibility of being wrong and others' opinions are wrong ones with the possibility of being right."

Whether the scholar mistakes or not in concluding the right jurist verdict, he is to be rewarded by Allah Almighty. Further, he is to be excused by Allah if he is mistaken in his juristic reasoning. There is no way that anyone can be positive about the correctness of any juristic reasoning, for in this field right and wrong are absolutely relative matters  .

Out of all this, we conclude that instead of exaggerating these issues of juristic reasoning and being fanatic about them, we should direct our efforts to the more serious matters. It is worth noting that having minds void of great concerns, expectations and objectives is the most probable reason that leads people to the abyss of disagreement and carries them away from unity and harmony. Without great concerns, people would fight and discord on the minutest matters.

It should be warned and cautioned against the consequences of being distracted with subsidiary issues away from more serious ones. Muslim scholars should not pay attention to the secondary matters and forget about major ones. They should not hold mistakes to be sins, the desired to be obligatory and the disliked to be impermissible. This is a waste of time that extinguishes the flames of enthusiasm.

We understand that it is treacherous to our nation to deluge it with a torrent of disputes and arguments about marginal matters disagreed on by our ancestors, disputed by the late scholars and unlikely to be agreed upon by contemporary Muslim scholars. It is treacherous to do this and overlook the nation's problems, tragedies, calamities and challenges of this time and all times.

ـ We believe that it is our duty in the present to take care of the nation's serious issues, not only through words and sermons. Instead, this can be done by activating the mechanisms of interacting with these troubles in reality and the relentless endeavor to have a positive contribution to elevate the injustice done to the Muslim nation and Muslim countries. This aim can be attained also through concerting efforts, working within the available channels, and maximizing all the potentials to contribute to the rise of the nation. To reach this end, we can also turn the attention, minds and hearts of the Muslims to the major concerns of the nation and shed light on them. We should also try hard to make each and every individual Muslim bear his part of the burden of accomplishing this task so as to facilitate reaching this end.

Back to About Us