0

Did Zahiri Madhab originate in the Salaf era? Can we follow some rules?

5
  • No, the Dhahiri madhab has completely flawed methodology and are heretical in fiqh. The only valid options are the 4 madhahib, or getting an opinion from a scholar directly and following them. Commented Apr 21 at 10:26
  • @Syed M. Sannan your statement requires evidence. The main difference at least between ibn Hazm's interpretation of the Dhahiri school of fiqh and the other madhhabs is that he only accepted ijma' of sahabah as among the osol and didn't care of any ijma' afterwards.
    – Medi1Saif
    Commented May 8 at 9:07
  • @Medi1Saif Well, there are quite a few flaws mentioned by scholars popularly besides what you mentioned. Namely, almost complete rejection of the usage of qiyas in their usul, interpretation of verses in an extra-literal manner where they would completely and entirely reject any implications and only rely on very explicit words. I can't find a reference but I have heard a famous quote of (more in next message) Commented May 8 at 11:51
  • Ibn Hazm rahmatullahi alayh that said (paraphrasing): "The verses in surah al isra that order to not even say "uff" to your parents do not convey that you should not beat them. Rather, the verses proceeding it are the ones that actually are the basis for the impermissibility of hitting them.". So basically, according to his usul, if the proceeding verses and other verses or hadith that explicitly tell you to not repel and abuse your parents weren't revealed / told, then it would not be impermissible to do so and it would be invalid to take the ruling out of the implication from the "uff" verse Commented May 8 at 11:53
  • I can't find a reference for this quote right now as I am in a bit of urgency, but it is quite popular and used by multiple scholars in their works refuting the dhahiri usul. You can look it up and let me know if you find it. Commented May 8 at 11:54

1 Answer 1

0

The Ahl al-Dhahir focus on submitting solely to the Wahy (Qur'an and Authentically transmitted Sunnah of the Messenger), they reject all other Usul that are based on Dhann (assumption, speculation) and likewise they also reject Taqlid (blind following).

The Madhab is attributed to Dawud al-Isfahani al-Dhahiri, who was a contemporary of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Dawud is considered to be the founder of the Madhab. However, the Dhahiris simply consider Dawud as a scholar who taught the correct beliefs that were already being taught by other Salaf, and which were also taught by the Sahaba before them. They do not consider Dawud the founder of their methodology, nor do they blindly follow his opinions, he is like any other scholar from the Salaf who did Ijtihad, although he was one of the well known ones who adhered strictly to the Wahy alone without following any other Asl in the religion. Al-Dhahabi has a good biography of him in his book Siyar a'lam al-Nubala.

Now, to answer your question as a Dhahiri myself: We do not consider our methodology to be a Madhab like the 4 Madhahib, rather we see it more as a Manhaj that we implement in both our Aqidah and in our Fiqh. In Aqidah we simply submit to the Dhahir (apparent) of the Qur'an and Authentic Sunnah, without implementing anything of our Ra'iy (personal opinions) nor by doing Taqlid (blind following) of anyone after Rasulallah. In Fiqh we do exactly the same. So if a person asks "Should we follow this methodology?", we would say that this is something obligatory upon each and every Muslim, since we believe that every Muslim has been ordered to submit to the Wahy alone, and that they've been prohibited to differ from it or to follow anything besides it. If the person means "Should we follow the Dhahiri opinions" as your question says, then we would say No, because we believe that Taqlid (blind following) is completely prohibited and therefore a Muslim should not blind follow anyone, rather what a person should do if they want to look into the Dhahiri opinions is that they should always try to seek the evidences which the Dhahiris use to come to their conclusion. If they bring Qur'an and Sunnah, then follow it. And if they made a mistake and brought an evidence that is weak then do not follow it. It's as simple as that.

As for what the other commenter said regarding Ibn Hazm, then to reject this would be heretic itself. Anyone who knows the Arabic language properly will affirm that the prohibition of "Uff" is only for saying "Uff", just like if I were to tell you "Do not say ew to me" you wouldn't say "he told me not to hit him", this'd be a lie. Allah told us in the Qur'an that he has explained in detail what is forbidden for us, and he said that the words of the Wahy are clear. Therefore if all he revealed regarding the parents were "do not say uff", and he said absolutely nothing else regarding them, not in the Qur'an nor in the Sunnah. Then if we were to say that he prohibited us to do anything else to our parents, it would be a lie upon Allah since we'd have no clear cut proof to ascribe this prohibition to him, and we'd not only go against the Arabic language, rather we'd go against the many Ayaat that say that everything of the religion has been clarified in detail for us and that every prohibition has already been explained by Allah. We'd also be speaking about Allah without knowledge, since ascribing commands and prohibitions to the religion means to ascribe them to Allah, for only he has the right to legislate in to the religion. But Alhamdulilah, there are many clear verses that prohibit doing anything evil to the parents besides just saying "Uff".

If you want a short summary of the Usul of our methodology, I can send a pdf in English with evidences from the Qur'an and Authentic Sunnah.

1
  • I want to contact you. Please give me your email or other contact for more information.
    – Krukaf
    Commented May 21 at 2:44

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .