FAQ in the category of Madhhabs and Sects

The word madhhab is derived from an Arabic word meaning "to go" or "to take as a way. Though there are thousands of mujtahids- the performer of ijtihad, which is the act of deducing secondary judgments from the Quran and Hadiths- in the circle of Ahl-i Sunnah-the close followers of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the renowned ones to whom are adhered are these twelve imams:

1) İmam-ı Azam Abu Hanifa

2) İmam-ı Malik

3) İmanı-ı Shafiî

4) İmam-ı Ahmad b. Hanbal

5) İmam-ı Avza'î

6) İmam-ı Sufyan b. 'Uyayna

7) İmam Sufyan as-Savri

8) İmam Dawud

9) İmam Muhammad İbn-al Jarir at-Tabari

10) İbn-i Hazm

11) İmam-ı Abu bakr b. Munzir

12) İmam-ı İshak İbn-i Rahvayh

They thoroughly deserved to be the addressee of the verse To whom is given the knowledge, is given the bountiful good deeds, and the hadith: To whom God wills good deeds, he makes him knowledgeable in religion.

Their successors could not reach to the degree they covered in knowledge and ijtihad. Though previously the number of the right sects rose to twelve, because the followers of the eight gave out, the number diminished to four.

In his work Madhal, Muhammad Sayyid gave an extensive analysis of the history of sects. We quote some parts from this book here:

Before the sects formed, one would consult to a mujtahid about an issue, while about another he would go to some other.

To the end of the period of tabiin-, the companions of the ashab who are the companions of Prophet Muhammad-, the institution of ijtihad slowly began to stabilize and the study of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) began to be instructed as a separate branch.

With the beginning of the age of mujtahids, the occupations concerning ijtihad were properly set, and ijtihad became separated as an independent branch. The great mujtahids like the imam of Iraqis Abu Hanifa, that of Mecca and Medina Imam Malik, and that of the Egyptians Imam Shafii searched through the work of the Ashab-the companions of Prophet Muhammad- and of the tabiin with great pains and set the judgments of the issues of fiqh to which answers were given before or not, by gathering them together. Thus, fiqh and the system of fiqh became two different branches.

Hence, the institutions of fiqh established that way are each called a sect, and their founders are named as imam.

The science of fiqh, thus the sects, did not begin with the four imams. As is stated before, the onset of ijtihad and so the establishment of sects goes back to the age of happiness and tranquility-in which Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived. Some statements of Kevseri about this issue are given below:

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) instructed his companions the science of fiqh, and prepared them in deducing judgments from religious sources. Moreover, about six companions of his were issuing fatwa-judgments delivered by capable religious people- in the period of the Prophet. The companions continued getting instruction from these people about fiqh, after the passing of the Prophet. They had friends renowned in issuing fatwa among the ashab-companions of Prophet Muhammad- and tabiin-the companions of the ashab. Many of the tabiin, mostly from the people of Medina, began to gather the rather scattered fatwas related from the companions of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) about the fields of fiqh and hadith. The Seven Scholars of fiqh from the people of Medina have high ranks in the field of fiqh.

Hz Omar built the city of Kufa and sent Ibn-i Masud there to instruct people on the science of fiqh.

Ajluni states that, aside from the other provinces of Iraq, only in Kufa, 1500 companions of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) got instruction on fiqh.

While all the True (Haqiqa) sects agreed upon the essentials of religion, they expressed different ijtihads about the secondary issues. The Muslims have adhered to one of these sects in issues of prayer and practice. Even the people of knowledge and of closeness to God each adhered to one of these sects. For example, İmam-ı Muhammad, İmam-ı Abu Yusuf, Sarahsi, Kadıhan, Kııduri, İbn-i Abidin adhered to the sect of Hanafi; İmam-ı Ghazali, Rafıi, Navavi, Fahraddin-i Razi, Taftazani, İmam-ı Suyuti to that of Shafii; İbnu'l-Hacib, Zarkani, Muhyiddin-i Arabi,
Abu'l-Hasani Shazelî to that of Maliki; and Abdulkadir-i Gaylani, İbni Kudama, Javzi to that of Hanbali. Countless great people of knowledge who produced innumerable works by mixing the divine and mental sciences and illumined their times did not endeavor to perform ijtihad and took it as an honor to adhere to the four mujtahids. They saw their security and happiness in following these great imams. The great people of knowledge of the heydays of Islam became the rightful successors of these four mujtahids with the work they published and the pupils they instructed.

Thousands of people of knowledge and reflective people of different times and places, and of different dispositions and jobs, jointly adhered to the sects of these four imams, and practiced themselves and helped people practice the ijtihads of these imams.

It is not a blind imitation that scholars of such Islamic sciences as theology, explanation of the Quran, and hadith adhered to the mujtahids. The imitation of theirs is based on study and research. Based on this imitation, there lies the respect for specialization.

Is it possible that people of that knowledge and precise reason stuck to a false way all their lives and blindly followed these great mujtahids? No reason can propose this.

The gathering of these learned around these four sects is a wall of iron around these sects and an indestructible barrier like that of Dhulkarneyn. A wall that cannot be penetrated and pierced by any devil

These people acknowledged all the judgments of the great mujtahids as the truth; so they did not oppose to them. For example, Imam Ghazali, who deserved the respect of the Muslims all over the Islamic world, though he earned the rank Huccatul-Islam (the proof of Islam), in ijtihad, he adhered to Imam Shafii and stated: I studied the field of ijtihad, and my studies led me to the sect of Shafii.

In everything, success is dependent upon the divine help. If the help of God escapes a person then he cannot achieve his aims with his own efforts. Of course, the door of the causes must be knocked at and the requirements be fulfilled. However, the essential is the help and guidance of God. It is connected with this fact that the sects diminished to four from twelve.

One of the issues, which attract much argument, is that of the sects. As well as trying to show it as a cause of separation, some people aim at blundering minds with demagogy. When looked into attentively, it will be seen that the sects emerged out of necessity and have never been a cause of separation.

Islam, which is composed of faith and practice, the sects in it deal with the realm of practice. That more than one sect emerged stems from the fact that the imams of sects understood the outer principles differently. (Risale-i Nur, Mektubat, 449)

For example, while Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was praying, his forehead bled because of stones on the ground. Hazrath Aisha (may God be pleased with her) took the stone from his forehead. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) got his ritual ablution again and continued praying. The Imam of the sect Hanafi Imam Azam, and that of the sect Shafii Imam Şafii handle this issue in two different ways: Imam Azam concludes that because the forehead of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) bled because of the stone, he renewed his ablution; while Imam Shafii says that it was because Hazrath Aisha touched his forehead that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) got his ablution. Thus, in the sect Hanafi it was accepted that even a little drop of blood takes away ablution; while in the sect Shafii the touch of women takes it away. As is seen, both views are correct and have sound evidence of their own.

The advent of sects

Until our Prophet (pbuh), the Sharia-the set of Islamic laws- concerning secondary details have been revealed differently, while the essentials and basics of it stayed the same; moreover, even in the same century different people were given different Sharia. But with the coming of our Prophet (pbuh) there was no need for different Sharia and the religion he issued sufficed all the centuries long. But in the issues that are secondary and pertaining to details there have been a need for the sects. The imams of the right sects fulfilled this duty and solved the problems of the humanity. As a miracle, our Prophet (pbuh) prophesized that these imams would come and would accomplish a big responsibility, and they verified him with the work and service they have performed.

The Islamic sects have never allowed internal clash and disorder-except for some small instances- and the imams of these sects have always been respectful to each other and never denied one another, and did not claim assertively that they intended to establish a sect, and they expressed their views and ijtihads- deducing secondary judgments from the Quran and Hadiths, which were later gathered together to form a sect, only when there was need for it.

For example, when Imam Azam (80-150, of the Hegira) expressed his ijtihad about an issue, he would say: This is the view of Numan bin Sabit (Imam Azam). This is the best of the views we could deduce. Whoever expresses a better view than this, he is the one closer to the truth.

Imam Malik (the founder of the sect Maliki, 93-179 of the Hegira) said, I am human. Sometimes I err, and sometimes say just the right thing. For this reason, examine my views and ijtihad. If you find them suitable for the Book and the Sunnah-the way Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) lived, accept them; and if not, deny. (Hayreddin Karaman, Fıkıh Usulü,33)

Also the founder of the sect Hanbali, Imam Hanbali (164-241, of the Hegira), and that of the sect Shafii, Imam Shafii (150 – 204, of the Hegira), never asserted themselves and did not speak impolitely and did not offend their colleagues. Later on, the views and ijtihads of these knowledgeable people were gathered together by their pupils and other knowledgeable people and presented to the benefit of the community, in order for them to pray in peace.

Is it possible that the truth be more than one?

There is a question which was asked fervently and challengingly in the newspaper articles against Muslims, and which is still repeated much: The truth is only one; how come the different and even contrary views of the four sects are the truth at the same time?

Bediüzzaman answers this question, A glass of water has five effects upon five different patients: For the first one it is a must because for his illness it has a healing effect. For another it is as dangerous as poison because of his illness; it is medically forbidden for him. For another the water is a little dangerous; so it is reprehensible. For another it is good and without harm; so it is Sunnah for him. For the last one it is neither hazardous nor beneficial; medically it is permissible for him. And here the truth has become many. All the five are correct. Can you say that the water is just a remedy, and so obligatory, and that there is no other truth other than it.

Just like this example, divine judgments vary according to the adherents of the sects. And they change truthfully and each one becomes the truth itself.

Whichever of the secondary issues, which seem different in each sect, we look into, we can see that the basis and grounds upon which they are put are each right and correct. About this issue, Imam Sharani wrote a book and put forth how the imams of sects understood issues by making a comparison between them.

An example:

The imams of sects differed not in Islamic issues, but in the way of practice and with suitable reasons for them. All the imams, for example, have agreed upon the wiping of the head in performing ablution, but differed in its style and amount.

The decree of God, who made it a must on us to get ablution, Wipe your heads, has come with the verse bi ruusikum. One of the richest of the languages, in Arabic, the letter b comes to the beginning of words to mean sometimes to beautify, sometimes some, and sometimes to join. The imams of sects have understood differently the meaning of b in the beginning of the verse of ablution; and this caused different practices.

For this reason, Imam Malik says, When wiping the head, the entire head must be wiped, because the b here is used to beautify the word. It doesnt have separate a meaning.

Imam Abu Hanifa, however, says, This b is the b which has the meaning of some. So it is enough to wipe just a part of the head.

And Imam Shafii says, This b is the b that means to join. So, if the hand touches the head, and just some hairs, it is enough. This being the case, it is evident that all the imams of sects are on the right path and that the judgments that seem contradictory in secondary issues are not a cause of separation, and that the claims of the people with bad intentions are baseless.

It is a school of Sufism, which accepts that existence is peculiar to God and which deny the existence of creatures by saying: La mavcuda illa hu (There is no existent save Him.) The founder of this school is Muhyiddin-i Arabii. There are not many great people who entered this way except Sadeddin Konvevii.

Although some of the views of Muhyiddin-i Arabii were accepted by the Sufis that came after him, this way did not become a path that attracted large crowds like other tariqahs-a Muslim religious order. While on the path of Unity of Existence creatures are denied for the sake of God, materialists and naturalists took to the way of denying God for the sake of nature by deviating this way to a very contrary direction to the understanding of this great knowledgeable person.

Let us first focus on the words of unity and existence. The opposite of unity is multitude. For example, five different letters are multitude, but if they are united and one word is obtained, then unity is provided.
There are innumerable examples of this point in the book of Universe. Just like the way hundreds of branches come before us as one tree, billions of cells unit in just one body. The term Necessarily Existing One is used for the sacred existence of One God; and the term possibly existent one is used for the existence of His creatures that form the circle of multitude.

Necessarily Existent: The Existence of God whose existence is from Himself, who is in no need whatsoever of the creation of any other for existence, and who is existent eternally. Possibly existent: One whose existence is depended on the creation of its Creator, who is obliged to instantly vanish when He wills; in that respect the existence of the creatures whose existence and non-existence are the same according to the power of their Creator.

Thus, when he enters the condition of spiritual intoxication, a knowledgeable person on the path of Unity of Existence attributes existence only to the Necessary Existence and denies the possible existence. He says, La mavcuda illa hu i.e. there is no existent save Him.

It is clear that this sentence is uttered at the time of spiritual intoxication, because if there were no existent other than Him, then it would not have been possible for him to say these words. But the person who says these words is not in such a situation as to realize this.

A small example of the situation of spiritual intoxication can sometimes be seen in our daily lives. When he is wholly absorbed in the meaning, someone who reads a work of knowledge in a way begins not to see the words. He does not recollect them or occupy himself with them. He becomes absorbed in knowledge with all his being. At this point, he forgets both the book and his fingers that hold and his eyes that see it.

In the Mesneve-i Nuriye, the Unity of Existence is described as a spiritual intoxication and a joy of unity that escapes understanding. and it is pointed out that this path cannot be explained with reason.

When we hold a mirror against the Sun, it will be seen on that mirror. With the light of the Sun, the mirror also gets light. It also begins to shine. If that mirror were possessive of consciousness it would bear the light of the Sun in its heart, believe in it, know that all colors, light and heat that it possesses come from it and would be thankful to it. Imagine that this conscious mirror nears to the Sun. The nearer it draws the more light it will get and the brighter it will shine; on the other hand the warmer it will get and it will eventually burn up. The closer it gets to the Sun, the bigger the reflection of it on the mirror. Finally, the entire mirror is covered with the Sun. From then on there is no place for anything in its heart. As it continues to get closer, the mirror begins not to see itself because of the intensity of the light. It loses consciousness with intense heat and light, and goes into spiritual intoxication. There remains neither its self nor its light anymore. If the mirror says in this situation that there is nothing except the Sun this is only the expression of its spiritual intoxication.

In the Risale-i Nur Collection, in The Letters, it is pointed out empathically: he should not change this way, which pertains to the heart and to illuminations and certain states, into a form which pertains to the reason, knowledge, and words (The Letters, 29. Letter, Fifth Alusion). And in the Flashes, by saying that propagating this issue of unity of existence to people of this time would bring about serious harms, Bediüzzaman points out that many people are attracted to materialism and that it would just bring about the opposite effect to try to direct people to this path in this time of unwariness in which causes are excessively regarded and he says:

For the highest of the elite, who pass out of the sphere of causes and in accordance with renouncing everything other than God, sever their attachment to contingent beings and enter a state of absolute absorption in God, this way is a righteous way. However, to present it as intellectual knowledge to those who are submerged in causes, enamored of the world, and plunged into materialist philosophy and Nature, is to drown them in Nature and materiality and to distance them from the reality of Islam. (The Letters, 29. Letter, Fifth Allusion)

There are some medicines on which it reads: Do not put within reach of children. This path is like that. Its provision is to be the purest of the pure, to be superior in closeness to God. This is not even recommended for them every time, only when they are in the state of spiritual intoxication. In other words, only when they are lost in the ocean of oneness and they have lost contact with anything else except God can they say: There is no existent save Him

In the above statement, the ones who criticize these exclusive people recklessly are answered with the expression of For the highest of the elite, this way is a righteous way.

Imagine a fruit in our hand. This fruit came into existence with the deed of khalk-creation and the name the Creator manifested itself in it. If it were not for this deed and this manifestation this fruit could not have come into being. These exclusive people feel and experience this meaning, which we understand scientifically and mentally, and judge that this fruit does not exist. When they come out of this state, they eat their fruits with pleasure and offer thanks to God who is the Ever Providing. There is also no thanksgiving in the condition of spiritual intoxication, because there is neither fruit nor human being there.

In the Risale-i Nur Collection, while it is said that this path is rightful and its followers are the purest of the pure, it is especially pointed out that this path is not the ultimate way of truth as is supposed. It is emphasized that this path stayed personal, not accepted by many with the expression: For this reason, this way is not to be seen explicitly in the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs, the leading authorities and interpreters of the Law, and the authorities of the first generations of Islam.

Neither the Companions nor the Imams of sects nor such exclusive people as Imam Ghazali, Imam Rabbani, and Abdulkadir Gaylani who were charged with the duty of leading their ages entered such a way. They canalized all their efforts into instructing and warning people, endearing the truth and showing the nastiness of the false, which we call the duty of prophethood. This sacred duty can only be fulfilled with wakefulness not with intoxication. In fact, Muhyiddin-i Arabi states that their path is personal by saying: The one who has not risen to our rank should not read our book.

Another point highlighted in the Risale-i Nur Collection is that a person of closeness on this path develops only in his faith in God; on the other hand, by not thinking about other pillars of faith or by supposing them as imagination, he cannot relish them. If the expression There is no existent save you., which is uttered in the condition of spiritual intoxication, is said wakefully, then it would come to mean not heeding the other five pillars of faith.

On the other hand, to claim this view wakefully is so big a murder as reducing the manifestations of the names of God to imagination and supposition. If the livelihood were imagination, then the name Provider, God forbid, would not be real. When you take creatures as imagination, then the creation of God becomes imagination. As an endless power and will are not needed to create imaginary things, the sublimity of all the divine names would be hidden. Only God would be regarded; His names, deeds, and the creatures upon which these names and deeds manifest themselves would not be reflected upon. Therefore, it is clear that this cannot be an elevated path in closeness to God.

One of the issues, which attract much argument, is that of the sects. As well as trying to show it as a cause of separation, some people aim at blundering minds with demagogy. When looked into attentively, it will be seen that the sects emerged out of necessity and have never been a cause of separation.

Islam, which is composed of faith and practice, the sects in it deal with the realm of practice. That more than one sect emerged stems from the fact that the imams of sects understood the outer principles differently. (Mektubat, 449)

For example, while Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was praying, his forehead bled because of stones on the ground. Hazrath Aisha (may God be pleased with her) took the stone from his forehead. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) got his ritual ablution again and continued praying. The Imam of the sect Hanafi Imam Azam, and that of the sect Shafii Imam Şafii handle this issue in two different ways: Imam Azam concludes that because the forehead of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) bled because of the stone, he renewed his ablution; while Imam Şafii says that it was because Hazrath Aisha touched his forehead that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) got his ablution. Thus, in the sect Hanafi it was accepted that even a little drop of blood takes away ablution; while in the sect Shafii the touch of women takes it away. As is seen, both views are correct and have sound evidence of their own.

The advent of sects

Until our Prophet (pbuh), the Sharia-the set of Islamic laws- concerning secondary details have been revealed differently, while the essentials and basics of it stayed the same; moreover, even in the same century different people were given different Sharia. But with the coming of our Prophet (pbuh) there was no need for different Sharia and the religion he issued sufficed all the centuries long. But in the issues that are secondary and pertaining to details there have been a need for the sects. The imams of the right sects fulfilled this duty and solved the problems of the humanity. As a miracle, our Prophet (pbuh) prophesized that these imams would come and would accomplish a big responsibility, and they verified him with the work and service they have performed.

The Islamic sects have never allowed internal clash and disorder-except for some small instances- and the imams of these sects have always been respectful to each other and never denied one another, and did not claim assertively that they intended to establish a sect, and they expressed their views and ijtihads- deducing secondary judgments from the Quran and Hadiths, which were later gathered together to form a sect, only when there was need for it.

For example, when Imam Azam (80-150, of the Hegira) expressed his ijtihad about an issue, he would say: This is the view of Numan bin Sabit (Imam Azam). This is the best of the views we could deduce. Whoever expresses a better view than this, he is the one closer to the truth.

Imam Malik (the founder of the sect Maliki, 93-179 of the Hegira) said, I am human. Sometimes I err, and sometimes say just the right thing. For this reason, examine my views and ijtihad. If you find them suitable for the Book and the Sunnah-the way Hz Mohammad pbuh) lived, accept them; and if not, deny. (Hayreddin Karaman, Fıkıh Usulü,33)

Also the founder of the sect Hanbali, Imam Hanbali (164-241, of the Hegira), and that of the sect Shafii, Imam Shafii (150 – 204, of the Hegira), never asserted themselves and did not speak impolitely and did not offend their colleagues. Later on, the views and ijtihads of these knowledgeable people were gathered together by their pupils and other knowledgeable people and presented to the benefit of the community, in order for them to pray in peace.

Is it possible that the truth be more than one?

There is a question which was asked fervently and challengingly in the newspaper articles against Muslims, and which is still repeated much: The truth is only one; how come the different and even contrary views of the four sects are the truth at the same time?

Bediüzzaman answers this question, A glass of water has five effects upon five different patients: For the first one it is a must because for his illness it has a healing effect. For another it is as dangerous as poison because of his illness; it is medically forbidden for him. For another the water is a little dangerous; so it is reprehensible. For another it is good and without harm; so it is Sunnah for him. For the last one it is neither hazardous nor beneficial; medically it is permissible for him. And here the truth has become many. All the five are correct. Can you say that the water is just a remedy, and so obligatory, and that there is no other truth other than it.

Just like this example, divine judgments vary according to the adherents of the sects. And they change truthfully and each one becomes the truth itself.

Whichever of the secondary issues, which seem different in each sect, we look into, we can see that the basis and grounds upon which they are put are each right and correct. About this issue, Imam Sharani wrote a book and put forth how the imams of sects understood issues by making a comparison between them.

An example:

The imams of sects differed not in Islamic issues, but in the way of practice and with suitable reasons for them. All the imams, for example, have agreed upon the wiping of the head in performing ablution, but differed in its style and amount.

The decree of God, who made it a must on us to get ablution, Wipe your heads, has come with the verse bi ruusikum. One of the richest of the languages, in Arabic, the letter b comes to the beginning of words to mean sometimes to beautify, sometimes some, and sometimes to join. The imams of sects have understood differently the meaning of b in the beginning of the verse of ablution; and this caused different practices.

For this reason, Imam Malik says, When wiping the head, the entire head must be wiped, because the b here is used to beautify the word. It doesnt have separate a meaning.

Imam Abu Hanifa, however, says, This b is the b which has the meaning of some. So it is enough to wipe just a part of the head.

And Imam Shafii says, This b is the b that means to join. So, if the hand touches the head, and just some hairs, it is enough. This being the case, it is evident that all the imams of sects are on the right path and that the judgments that seem contradictory in secondary issues are not a cause of separation, and that the claims of the people with bad intentions are baseless.


Meanwhile, although the law is the same, one hundred percent different and contrary verdicts are given from different courts because of differences of understanding. As no one can oppose this fact, it is not very healthy and compatible with realism that the issue of sects is that much exaggerated.

Can the sects join? As human beings are not the same, so are their sects not the same, though their Sharia is just one. If the majority of humans were to lead the same kinds of lives just like the pupils of a school, then the sects might be united. However, todays circumstances do not allow this. (7)

Thus, each believer must perform his prayers in accordance with a sect and must follow a certain sect. But the imams of sects and great mujtahids-the performer of ijtihad which is the act of deducing secondary judgments from the Koran and Hadiths-do not have to follow each other; they act according to their ijtihads. We should not listen to the ones who criticize the imams of sects.

Can the views of the sects be united on a certain issue, or who can do that?

This is the act of bringing the judgments of two or more sects together about a certain issue. Only the imams of sects or the ones equal to them can do this. After this unification, if the outcome is a judgment that cannot be accepted by any sect, then this unification is not permitted. For example; in marriage, joining the sects of Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafii, and thus performing a marriage without family, the money paid to the bride, and witness is not acceptable; because neither an imam of sect nor any other mujtahids accepted this kind of a marriage. (8)

Common view is that after the happening of an event and performance according to a certain judgment, it is not permissible to accept the judgment of a sect that changes the judgment of this event. But; it is because the sects are a blessing that a deed is accepted by one of the sects in the issues that escape compensation, and this leads man to peace of heart. For example, Imam Abu Yusuf performs his Friday prayer after he has washed in public bath. Afterwards he is informed that there was a dead mouse in the water tank of the bath. According to the sect of Hanifi, his ablution is not acceptable and he performed his prayer, notwithstanding. But as it was not possible for him to perform his Friday prayer again-as it is performed together-, he said: We will act in accordance with our brothers from Medina. But in the issues that can be compensated, this is not possible. If we act that way, we may ruin our spiritual beings.

Unification can be applied after the unintentional performance of a deed. And this can be in the issues that cannot be compensated; for example, the Friday prayer; because it is performed in certain times and under certain conditions. After the expiration of this time, this prayer cannot be compensated. But the midday prayer is not like that. If a condition that may have invalidated the prayer is realized later, if its period still continues, it is performed again; if the period is gone by it is compensated later.

Sources:
1. Mektubat, s. 449, Bediüzzaman Said Nursi.
2. a.g.e., s. 108
3. a.g.e., s. 449
4. Fıkıh Usulü, Hayreddin Karaman, s. 33.
5. Sözler, Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, s. 513.
6. Hayat ve Biz, Ahmed Şahin, s. 235
7. Sözler, Bediüzzaman Said Nursi, s. 512.
8. Fıkıh Usulü, Hayreddin Karaman, s. 34-35

Gerçeğe Doğru C:3, Zafer Yayınları

Alaaddin Başar (Prof.Dr.)

God has bestowed upon us incessant ease and mercy with differences between sects. Prophet Muhammad pointed out this fact with his hadith, The difference of my community is a vast mercy. This hadith includes the differences between sects, as well as covers all the positive differences.

Some statements and words in some verses and hadiths include different judgments. There may be more than one pearl in a mother-of-pearl. Just like that, mujtahids -the performers of ijtihad, which is the act of deducing secondary judgments from the Quran and Hadiths-, expressed different views about the pearls in the verses and hadiths. And this led to the opening of different doors. This difference is a big source of ease to the community of Mohammad.

God shows how easy the Sharia-set of rules of a religion- of Muhammad is:

God wills ease for you, not hardship.

He did not burden you with any hardships in religion.

And He casts away the burden upon them and the chains on their backs (i.e. does not order hard decrees like retaliation in manslaughter and cutting off the sinning organs of the body and the dirty clothes)

For example, the view of Imam Shafii: The ritual ablution must be refreshed when one touches a woman, causes hardships in the performance of the Hajj-pilgrimage in Islam to Mecca and Medina- under todays circumstances, because the Hajj must be performed having taken the ablution. In this crowd of millions of people, as it is difficult to apply this judgment, the followers of this sect perform the Hajj adapting to other sects.

The caliph of Abbasid Harun Rashid proposes to Imam Malik: Lets publish and deliver your books all over the Muslim world, and drive them to these. Imam Malik gives this answer: O caliph of the Muslims, it is a blessing upon this community from God that the learned have different views. Each one of them sticks to what they see as the truth. All of them are on the right path and ask the acceptance of God.

Positive differences took place at the time of the companions of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). And Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) let each Muslim to adhere to whomever he wished among the mujtahids, and so gave his consent to this kind of difference. He did not criticize his companions for this kind of disagreement, and saw the judgments of both sides as the truth.

Two companions who went on journey performed their prayers having ritually cleansed themselves using sand/earth (done only when water is not available), as they could not find water. And while the period of the prayer did not still pass, they found water. One of them re-performs the prayer; the other does not, as he thinks his first prayer is enough. When they are back, they ask Prophet Muhammad of their situation. Prophet Muhammad says to the one who did not pray again: You acted according to the sunnah-the style of Prophet Muhammad, and to the other: You deserve reward twice.

The hadith: My companions are like stars, if you obey them you will succeed. Also proves this point. Based on this fact, it is clear that anyone can choose whichever one of the right sects he wishes.

When a believer prays in a place where he does not know the direction of Mecca, it is accepted of him if he decides to turn to a direction he chooses or turns to different directions for each part of the prayer.

By this way, the Muslims prefer permission to perfection. And this is a great blessing for them. In cases of hardships, Muslims can act according to the permission of another right sect in issues that have no solution in their sects, and by this way, they avoid hardships.

Surely, the Sharia of Muhammad conformable to the nature of the humanity revealed by God.

Although the difference between mujtahids is a blessing to the community, it led to the destruction of the former communities. Prophet Muhammad says in one of his hadiths: Although differences were suffering to the former communities, they are a blessing to my community.

The judgments were clear for the communities of the former prophets. The verses were not open to debate. It was clear that in the definite and open issues there would be no disagreement. People had difficulty obeying these clear judgments, disagreed and this disagreement led them to destruction. However, our conditions have done away with the constriction that was put on the former communities. For example, in the Sharia of Prophet Moses, the only punishment for a murderer was retaliation in the same way.

In that of Jesus, only the blood money was required, retaliation was forbidden. In the Sharia of Muhammad, though, the family of the murdered has the choices of retaliation, blood money, and pardon. Another example; while in their Sharia it is obligatory to cut off the part of the clothes that is dirty; in ours, cleansing with clean water is enough. There are lots of examples of this kind.

It is because all the four sects are right that it is seen legitimate to imitate any one of the judgments of a right sect in the event of a hardship. Because it is very crowded at the time of Hajj, unconsciously men may touch other women, and vice versa. In such a situation, the ablutions of Shafiis do not become spoilt. As it is virtually impossible to avoid such incidences during the performance of the components of Hajj, they imitate the sect of Hanafi; by saying the word of intention, they conform to Hanafi in that respect. They thus perform their prayers with peace and comfort without any apprehension.

In fact, as all kinds of devilish tricks are removed from these sacred places, hajjis do not realize that their hands touch the hand of a woman.

As can be seen, it is a mercy upon the Muslims that sects are different. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) pointed out this fact in one of his Hadiths: The disagreement of my community is mercy. (Keşfü'l-Hafa, 1:64)

As is seen in almost all religions, the followers of Islam separated into different sects. With the expression of Figlalı these sects are the schools of Islam in fields of faith and practice. (1) Mazhab-sect is a word derived from the root Z-H-B and means the way, one sticks to. (2) Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) points to the facts of disagreement in the humanity with his statement: The Jews were divided into 71 groups and the Christians into72. And my community will be divided into 73 groups. All of them will be cast into the fire, except one; and this group is the followers of me and my companions. (3) Another statement weak in relating: all of them are in the paradise, except one. (4)

Although there have been much debate over the soundness of the hadith about the 73 groups, for us this separation is a historical reality, and the hadiths about it are statements of this reality. (5)

When we come to the issue of what is the implied meaning of the 73 groups, there are mainly two views about this issue:
The first one: The ones who accept this expression literally.
They recount the groups of faith and complete the 73 groups with the branches of them.
The principles of these: the Hariji, the Shia, Mutazila, Jabriyya, and Murjia. There is no agreement among the people who try to come to the number 73 with these groups and their branches. (6)

The second: The ones who take the expression 73 groups as an implication to multiplicity.
In Arabic, the expressions like 7, 70, and 700 imply multiplicity. For example; the expressions in the some verses and hadiths seven heavens (7), seven sees (8), even if you repent for seventy times, God will not forgive them.(9), Faith is seventy and more branches, (10) show this fact.

Each group see themselves as the group who will be in paradise. (11)

Muvlut Ozler approaches to the expression all of them are in the fire except one. in this way: This implies not being directly in the fire; but not holding the truth which is the way of the Quran and Sunnah-the style of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)... Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) points out their mistakes in their views. (13)

Shatibi points out about the same subject: The expression of all of them are in the fire, except one is apparently a statement of warning. The state of being eternal in the fire or not is not expressed. Thus, in this statement there is no proof of eternity; because warning with hell can be directed both to disbelievers and to rebellious believers. (14)

Bediüzzaman describes the group of salvation with the following expression the perfect group of the right path. Hence, there will be only one, which will reach the complete salvation; the others will more or less deviate from the right path.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) draws a line on the ground, and says, This is the right path. And he then draws other lines to the right and left of this line. These are the other pathsOn each one of these ways, there is a devil inviting to that way. And recites this verse (16): This is my upright path, stick to it. Do not stick to any other so that it may lead you astray. (17)

It is clear that the shortest way between two points is a line. The curves outside of this more or less deviate from this line.

For example; the sect Muattıla, which denied the names of God performed over-simplification; and the sect Mushabbiha performed exaggeration by likening them to those of the creatures. And the Ahl-i Sunnah, which says, God has names which we cannot understand fully, follows the true path.

Likewise, in the issue of fate, Mutazila, which denies fate, fell into oversimplification; Jabriyya, which denies the free will of human, fell into exaggeration. Ahl-i Sunnah saying: There is a divine fate. But man has a small will of his own; so he is responsible. sticks to the right path.

Just like these two examples, the schools comprising the 73 groups, stood on either the pole of exaggeration or that of oversimplification. The right explanation is that of Ahl-i Sunnah.

Sources
1- Fığlalı, Ethem Ruhi, Çağımızda İtikadi İslam Mezhepleri, Selçuk Yay. İst. 1980, s. 1
2 -İbnu Manzur, Lisanu'l-Arab, Daru Sadır, Beyrut, I, 393-394
3- Tirmizi, İman,18; İbnu Mace, Fiten, 17; Ebu Davud, Sünne, 1
4- Aclûnî, Muhammed, Keşfu'l-Hafa, Daru İhyai't-Türasi'l-Arabi, Beyrut, 1351 h., I, 150
5- Bu konudaki görüşler için, bkz. Özler, Mevlüt, İslam Düşüncesinde 73 Fırka Kavramı, Nun Yay. İst. 1996, s. 29-39
6- Bkz. Özler, s. 67-78
7- Bakara, 27
8- Lukman, 27
9- Tevbe, 80
10- Müslim, İman, 58
11- Bkz. Özler, s. 93-95; Fığlalı, s. 5
12- Fığlalı, s. 2
13- Özler, s. 122
14- Şatıbî, Ebu İshak, el-İ'tisam, Daru'l- Kütübi'l- İlmiyye, Beyrut, 1995, s. 413
15 Nursi, Said, Mektubat, Envar Neş. İst. 1993, s. 106
16- Razî, Fahreddin, Mefatihu'l-Gayb (Tefsiru Kebir), Daru İhyai't- Türasi'l-Arabi, XIV, 3; İbnu Kesir, Hafız, Tefsiru'l-Kur'ani'l-Azim, Kahraman Yay. İst. 1985, III, 360; Kurtubi, Ebu Abdullah, El-Cami Liahkami'l-Kur'an, Daru'l-Kütübi'l-İlmiyye, Beyrut, 1993, VII, 90
17- En'am, 153

There is no issue in the true sects in which reason and mind contradict, because their bases are the Quran, Hadiths, unity and agreement of the community, and the proofs of the Sharia-Islamic set of laws- by the mujtahids. These proofs of the Sharia are a sound fortress beyond the power of all human factors to cause any damage. The people outside this fortress are exposed to the dangers and effects of the enemies of the Ahl-i Sunnah-the close followers of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

I want to point out to this important fact: The people who do not approve of sects, or do not stick to any one of them, or adapt the easier sides of each have deviated from the way of all the Muslims of centuries and have set off on a new way on their own. These kinds of people have their share from the verse, Whoever opposes to the Prophet and deviates from the way of the Believers after the truth has been clear to him, we will leave him in that way and cast him into the hell; what a bad place!

Whoever adheres to an imam of sect must stick to the judgments of his sect and persevere in it. But in case of a hardship he can act in accordance with the judgments of another sect, but on the condition that he should not leave his sect altogether. And this can be done only with the fatwa-the statement of a capable religious person- of a person of knowledge.

Imam Ghazali is of the same opinion:

If an adherent opted for a sect, then he must stick to it.

All in all, if someone changes his sect recklessly, it means he does not take those seriously.

One of the smart knowledgeable people of the last century, Muhammad Kavsari depicts the condition of these people as follows:

They are seen within every group but actually they do not belong to any one of them. There is no one more mischief-making and discordant than the one who puts on the guise of a group when he is with them, and changes it once he is within another.

Kavsari says in the same book that sectlessness is a bridge to disbelief.

Dr Ramazan al-Buti says on the same subject, The entire community of Muslims have agreed upon the fact that the mujtahids who helped us the most in retaining Islam as it is in our lives have been these four Imams (Imam-ı A'zam, Imam-ı Shafi'i, Imam-ı Malik and Imam-ı Hanbal). and adds that it is the biggest bad innovation to leave the ways of these imams and to invite people to sectlessness.

Ramazan al-Buti points out that those who argue sectlessness are trying to undermine the pillars of Islam instead of trying to solve new problems, and he says,

I have never seen these sectless searches for the answers of the issues about which the public ask all the time. All their efforts are directed to undermining the right sects which are guides to the public to security through adherence, and whose construction is well completed and rules established.

Dr. Ramazan el-Buti asks these sectless these two questions:

What if you invite people not to comply with engineers in the field of construction? What if you ask people not to apply to doctors in issues that demand diagnosis and medical treatment?

He himself answers these questions,

Surely this will cause people to damage their own houses while trying to repair them; and to end their own lives trying to heal themselves.

The biggest cause that brings the sectless to the abyss of danger and that hinders them from adhering to mujtahids is that they see their opinions and views equal and even superior to those of the mujtahids.

Imam-ı Sharani says,

Perform all of what the mujtahids decreed Sunnah-what is approved of by Prophet Muhammad; and abstain from the ones they decreed abominable. Do not endeavor to ask of them any proof, because you are well below them in rank. Unless you rise to their degree and embrace the Book and the Sunnah-the way Prophet Mohammad lived- directly, it is not possible for you to surpass them and to benefit from the same source that they do.

All the sects, I think, are adjacent to the Sharia, the way the fingers are so to the palm, and the shadow to its material.

Here I want to mention that point: It is a big example of pride to depend upon ones own opinion and not upon that of the mujtahids. And this brings about the spiritual breakdown of the person. Bediüzzaman makes this statement about the condition of these people:

With pride man is deprived of both material and spiritual excellences and virtues. If with the drive of pride, he does not appreciate the virtues of others and sees his virtues enough and superior, then this person is lacking. These kinds of people see their knowledge and virtues as superior to others, and by this way become deprived of the virtues and knowledge of the great people of knowledge. And exposed to anxieties and apprehensions, they more and more deviate from the right path. (Mesnevi-i Nuriye, Katre, 58)

Wherever is human there is disagreement, because this is part of the characteristics of human. Even twins of a family raised in the same culture, under the same material and spiritual circumstances, and instructed by the same teachers may disagree in some issues. This being the case, people growing up in different environments will show differences. Besides the factor of creation, the other factors having effect in this matter are shortly as follow:

The fact that the issues that are open to disagreement are actually unclear:

The example of Plato clarifies this issue very well: Plato says:
People cannot be far from the truth, as well as they cannot express it to the full. Every person penetrates into an aspect of the truth. The example is: Some blind reach the place of an elephant. Each one grabs an organ of the elephant and tries to imagine what it is. The one who grabs one of its legs says that this is a long and round animal similar to a trunk of a tree. The one who reaches to its back says that this is a creature like high hills. The one who grabs its ear says that it is a flat and thin creature that can be folded up. As is seen, each of them understood just one part of the truth, declared their friends wrong, and claimed that they are mistaken in the understanding of the truth. Most often, the disagreements arise not because the issues are unclear or hard to comprehend, but because each side of the disagreement does not know the view of the other. For this reason, Socrates says, If the thing upon which disagreement exits is known, every disagreement stops.1

When looked from the perspectives of Islamic sects, the people that failed to see the Koran as a whole came to false conclusions. For example, while it is mentioned in the Koran about the free will of the human, it is also stated that all kinds of will and power are peculiar to God. Therefore; while there are verses supporting the Mutazile who says that people create their own deeds and that God has no intervention in the deeds of His slaves; there are also verses supporting the Cebriyye who says that people have no will and that they are like leaves in the wind against the will of God. If looked into as a whole, not separately, the truth will be better understood. If I may put it this way, as it is better to look at the elephant and depict it as a whole; it is also better to look at the verses of the Koran as a whole. Otherwise, it may be thought that everyone says the truth at the first glance; but in reality the conclusion they reach is defective and lacking. For this reason, the matter will be better understood if all the verses about the issue are looked into. So, Man wills and God creates. In the things man wills he cannot escape responsibility. Thus the issue which is seen as two sided is understood and it is seen that they do not contradict one another.2

The difference of desires, interests, and dispositions: Disagreements arise because everyone has different desires, interests, and dispositions. About this issue, Spinoza says, What shows us the matter beautiful is our desires and tendencies.3

The difference of branches: There are very different groups of jobs. And these groups have principles and measures of their own. So, each group of job will proceed in accordance with their principles. And in the end, their conclusions will be different in the same issues. For example, there are differences in the way the scholars of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) and theology view the Quran.

Imitation: One of the reasons of the disagreement is the imitation of the old; because imitation causes blind and faulty conviction. Wherever there is blind conviction, it is just natural that excessive disagreements exist, because the mentality of imitation kills the objective reasoning and causes the minds to become dim. So everyone takes the statements of the one he imitates as the truth; thus, the disagreements in history continue without changing.

The difference in the capacity of understanding and insight: Abu Zahra says that in the letters of the institution Ihvanussafa these are related about this issue: There are lots of people whose capacity of understanding is high, evaluation precise, and reflection keen. In addition, there are the ones who are stupid, whose hearts are blind and confused. This is one of the reasons why the learned differed in their views and sects. As their understanding and capacities differ, their views and beliefs differ likewise.4

The desire for leadership and wish to dominate over others: This kind of a desire leads someone to the conviction that what he says is the ultimate truth and the opposite views are absolutely wrong. So, even if they are wrong, he insists on his views. Thus, disagreements strengthen.

Souces:
1- Muhammed Ebû Zehra, İslamda Siyasi İtikadi ve Fıkhi Mezhepler Tarihi, trc. Hasan Karakaya, Kerim Aytekin, İstanbul ts., s. 10.
2- Geniş bilgi için bkz. Sayın Dalkıran, İbn-i Kemal ve Düşünce Tarihimiz, İstanbul 1997, s. 71-73, 155-176; a. mlf. Osmanlı Devletinde Ehl-i Sünnetin Şii Akidesini Tenkidleri, İstanbul 2000, s. 83-132, 237-252.
3- Ebû Zehra, Mezhepler Tarihi, s.10.
4- Ebû Zehra, Mezhepler Tarihi, 12.

Although the Shia is divided into some subdivisions like Galiya, Zaydiyya, and Imamiyya, today with the term Shia, usually Imamiyya is meant.

They accept Hazrath Ali (may God be pleased with him) and respectively his two sons and grandchildren as the legitimate imam (caliphate) with the decree of God and the will of Prophet Mohammad, after the Prophet (pbuh) has passed away; and thus see it a pillar of faith to believe in the twelve imams. Because this group accepted only the twelve imams, they are called Isna Ashariyya; and because they take it as one of the pillars of faith to believe in the Imams, they are called Imamiyya; and because they base both their belief and prayers and conducts on the views of Imam Jafar as-Sadık, it is called Jafariyya.

The Shia is of the opinion that the Imamet, i.e. the caliphate, is not one of the simple things that can be left to the choice of the Muslims, as the Ahl-i Sunnah accepts. They think the caliphate is among the pillars and essentials of religion and thus the Shia must believe in the existence of the imam, as they must in God, the prophets, and the Hereafter. According to this view, the caliphs are pure like the prophets. They do not commit either small or big sins. Whoever does not accept them is in blasphemy. Moreover, their commands are the commands of God; their bans the bans of God. Obedience to them is obedience to God; riot against them is riot against God.

Today, Iran acknowledges the Imamiyya as an official sect, and gives the responsibility of imamet, which contains religious authority to Ayetullahil-Uzma. For this reason, people must obey this imam. It is like opposing to God and the Prophet to oppose him. It is accepted as an important essential in the Iranian constitution to believe in the twelve Imams, as is openly stated, The official religion of Iran is Islam, and official sect is Isna Asharri Jafari. And this article cannot be altered forever.(1)

The issue of caliphate is not included in the system of religion for the Ahl-i Sunnah, as opposed to the Shia. The imam, i.e. the caliph comes to power through an election and with the votes of the Muslims. Anyone with certain religious and worldly qualities can undertake the management of the Muslims. In no way can he be sinless and innocent.

When we come to the way Ahl-i Sunnah sees the twelve Imams; the eleven Imams (twelve with Hazrath Ali)-the descendants of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)- are each great people of knowledge and wisdom in terms of virtues, avoidance of evils and spiritual ranks.
Bediüzzaman recounts the twelve Imams, when he counts the addressees of the hadith: The learned of my community are like the prophets of the Children of Israel.(2) In his another statement; he introduces the twelve Imams as the great people of Ahl-i Sunnah, by describing the people of knowledge as the four Imams of sects and the twelve Imams.(3)

The twelve Imams are as follows: Hazrath Ali, Hazrath Hasan, Hazrath Hussein, Ali bin Hussein, Muhammad Bakır, Jafar-i Sadık, Musa Kazım, Ali Rıza, Muhammad Taki, Ali Naki, Hasan Askari, and Muhammad Mahdi (may God be pleased with them all)

Sources:
1. Çağımızda İtîkâdî İslâm mezhepleri, s. 118-139; Muvazzah îlm-i Kelam,s. 24-25.
2. Şualar, s. 527.
3. Emirdağ Lahikası, 1:201

It is possible to summarize the causes of these differences as follows:

1-It is just human to disagree. Hence, wherever is human, there is surely difference and disagreement. Lust, hatred, and intelligence in the composition of human beings are the grounds for disagreement. (1) For example, as not everyone is the same in terms of intellect, surely, there will be different ideas, and the ones without high intellectual capacity will incline to deny certain truths.


2-From the time Adam, people have lived in groups. Each group has its own way. Each one approves of their own way and prefers it to those of others. (2)

3-The verse: We ordained for each of you a Sharia and a way. If God willed, He would make you just one community, (3) points out the divine purpose in the disagreement of the humanity. In other words, if God willed, He would create man incapable of disagreement just like angels. However, He wanted color, action, and competition in the humanity and created humans inclined to disagreement.

God created the species of humanity capable of blooming thousands of species and of having qualities equal to those of thousands of species of animals. (4) Man is not limited in his feelings, desires, and emotions and; he is given the capability to reach and be reduced to limitless ranks.

If the humanity was not given the capacity of disagreement, as Hamdi Yazır put it: All humans would come and pass monotonously as in other species of animals. (5)

4-Disagreement makes the mind dynamic and active. Denying disagreement means denying the characteristics of the human and making the mind passive. (6) By overlooking the reality of disagreement, saying all the community should be in the same sect and of the same opinion is asking for the impossibletrying in vain. (7)

5-Some groups in the Moslem world evaluated and explained the Quran and Hadiths according to their desires. As Ibn-i Taymiyya said, they first stuck to a view, and then tried to base it with the Quran. (8) Moreover, they misinterpreted the verses contrary to their views. (9) However, it is much different to try to show that ones view is from the Koran than to try to show what is there in the Quran.

6-The ones who stray from the right path also turn to Mecca in prayers. So, they cannot be called disbelievers. (10) As Shatibi says, however much they have strayed from the right path, they have not gone out of religion. In the hadith about the 73 groups, the calling of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to them as my community is a proof of it; because if they have gone out of religion with their straying, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) would not call them my community. (11)

However, the ones who see Ali as God or who claim that the angel of revelation Gabriel mistakenly brought the revelation to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and such people are surely in blasphemy. (12)

Sources:
1-Kutub, Seyyid, Fi Zılali'l-Kur'an, Daru'ş-Şuruk, 1980, I, 215
2-Katib Çelebi, Katib, Mizanu'l- Hak fi İhtiyari'l - Ehak, Marifet Yay. İst. 1990, s. 198
3-Maide, 48
4-Nursi, Lem'alar, Sözler Yay. İst. 1990, s. 164
5-Yazır, III, 1700
6-Özler, s. 142
7-Katip Çelebi, s. 198
8-İbnu Teymiye, II, 225. Ayrıca bkz. Salih, Subhi, Mebahis fi Ulumi'l-Kur'an, Daru'l-İlm, Beyrut, 1368 h., s. 294
9-İbnu Teymiye, II, 223
10-Taftezani, Şerhu'l- Akaid, s. 191; Şatıbi, İ'tisam, s. 405
11-Şatıbi, IV, 139
12-İbnu Abidin, Reddü'l- Muhtar ale'd- Dürri'l - Muhtar, Daaru İhyai't- Türasi'l- Arabi, ts., III, 309-310; Şatıbi, İ'tisam, s. 405

In Islam, the religious judgments have two sources: the Book and the Sunnah: qiyas (analogy) and ijma (consensus), which are the next two things to be referred to after them, are essentially based on these two sources. Those four sources are called “four methods, four religious evidences” The four evidences are as follows:

1. the Book:

What is meant by the Book is the Quran. Our glorious book, which is the most essential source, has been preserved in the same form as it was first sent down; not even one letter of it has been changed because God Almighty, the owner of the glorious speech, has undertaken to preserve it and has preserved it. The first source to be referred to regarding a religious question is the Quran.

2. the Sunnah:

What is meant by the Sunnah is the holy words and deeds of the Messenger of Allah and the things that he saw but did not object to. Those acts of the Prophet are also called hadiths. The Companions (Sahaba) memorized thousands of hadiths regarding the details of religious judgments and decrees, preserved them and transferred them to Tabi’in, the generation coming after them. In 101 H, about four thousand hadiths regarding the details of religious judgments and decrees were compiled thanks to the efforts of Umar bin Abdulaziz for the first time. The Sunnah has an essential place in the determination of the religious judgments and decrees after the Quran.

3. Qiyas (Analogy):

It is to make a judgment about an issue through ijtihad based on a similar judgment that is definite. In other words, it is to apply a judgment regarding an issue that is definite by the book, the Sunnah or ijma (consensus) to a similar issue that is based on the same reason and wisdom. Qiyas can be applied only by a scholar who is at the level of ijtihad.   

4. Ijma (Consensus):

It is the unanimous agreement of the Islamic mujtahids living in the same age on a religious judgment about an issue. Accordingly, if there is a unanimous agreement on the judgments made by mujtahids through ijtihad regarding the same issue about which there is not a definite judgment in the Book and Sunnah, it becomes definite through the consensus of the ummah. If there is consensus about an issue, it is regarded to be a definite issue. The following hadiths indicate the issue:

“My ummah does not agree on something wrong.”1
What is regarded good by Muslims is good in the presence of Allah, too.”2

Ijtihad-Mujtahid:

To make efforts in order to make a judgment about worshipping and rules out of religious evidence is called ijtihad. The scholar who makes a judgment out of the religious evidence is called a mujtahid. A mujtahid must have full knowledge in the issues about the Quran, the Sunnah and Islamic law.  
Since the period of our Prophet, Islamic scholars have made ijtihads and acted accordingly when they have not been able to find clear evidence about an issue that they have needed a religious judgment in the Book and the Sunnah. Our Prophet let his Companions do so. As a matter of fact, when the Prophet appointed Muadh bin Jabal, a scholar and faqih from the Companions, as a judge to Yemen, he asked Muadh,   
“How will you judge there? How will you settle the problem when you are asked something or when a plaintiff came to you?”
Muadh: “By the Book of Allah.”
The Messenger of Allah: “If you cannot find it in the Book?”
Muadh: “By the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah”
The Messenger of Allah: “If you cannot find it there, either?”
Muadh: “If I cannot find it there, either, I will judge by my own ijtihad.”
Thereupon, the Messenger of Allah said, “Praise be to Allah, who made the Prophet’s messenger {Muadh} successful in the thing that the prophets consented to.”, expressing his pleasure about the words of Muadh.3

When our Prophet (pbuh) died, the Companions had memorized the Book and the Sunnah. However, among the Companions, those who had religious and legal competence in knowing the Quran and the Sunnah and understanding their decrees and meanings gave fatwas. They were the scholars and faqihs of the Companions. The most famous of them were Hazrat Umar, Hazrat Ali, Abdullah bin Mas’ud, Hazrat Aisha, Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Abbas and Abu Musa al-Ash’ari.

During the period of the Four Caliphs and later, Muslims asked those people about the problems they faced and they made judgments based on the Book and the Sunnah; when they could not find the answer in them, they used analogy. Thus, during the period of the Companions, consensus took place in many issues; and the Islamic law, fiqh, started to form.
Meanwhile, the Companions moved to some cities and settled there; they served Islam there through their knowledge. For instance, Hazrat Ali and Abdullah bin Mas’ud in Kufa, Anas bin Malik and Abu Musa al-Ash’ari in Basra, Abdullah bin Umar and Zayd bin Thabit in Madinah trained hundreds of students. The students that the Companions trained are called “Tabiin”. The heritage of the knowledge that the Messenger of Allah left was transferred to that generation. There were many scholars among them that had reached the level of ijtihad. For instance, Ibrahim an-Nahai, Hasan al-Basri, Tawus bin Qaysan are some of them.

Tabiin compiled the hadiths that the Companions narrated and their ijtihads. In addition, they made ijtihads related to the issues that there were no verses, hadiths or ijtihads of the Companions about. They tried to train the students that gathered around them. They guided their students and helped them to establish the foundations of the Islamic law, to examine the new issues thoroughly and to explain the judgments about them. That generation is called “Taba’ at-Tabiin”. Imam Azam, Imam Malik, Imam Shafii, Ahmad bin Hanbal, Sufyan ath-Thawri, Sufyan bin Uyayna are among the famous scholars of that generation. Although some of those people, for instance, Imam Azam saw some of the Companions, they are regarded to be among Taba’ at-Tabiin due to their scholastic nature.  

The formation of fiqh madhhabs took place in that period. The imams of Taba’ at-Tabiin compiled the ijtihads of the Companions and Tabiin. They themselves made ijtihads when it was necessary. They made scholastic studies on thousands of issues that Muslims faced and established certain rules. They lived in different cities and studied in the cities that they lived. On the other hand, the fatwa method of each of them was different. Some of them accepted only the Quran and the Sunnah as reference; some used analogy along with them; some gave fatwas based on their own views in the light of the Quran, the Sunnah and the consensus. Some of them took the customs and traditions of the region where he lived into consideration. Those kinds of ijtihads and fatwas facilitated the religious lives of Muslims.

Those ijtihads of the mujtahids were not about the essentials of Islam; they were about secondary issues. In the course of time, different ijtihads and explanations on the same issue appeared. Muslims accepted the ijtihads of the mujtahids living in their regions and acted accordingly in their worshipping and transactions.

That preference and favoring was replaced by madhab, which meant the way to be followed, in the course of time. That period was a very productive ground in which many Islamic sciences primarily hadith and tafsir were studied. Many scholars at the level of ijtihad were present. Since there were some people who accepted the views and fatwas of each mujtahid, eventually, each imam was regarded as the representative of a madhhab. That situation caused the appearance of hundreds of madhhabs.

In the course of time, most of the scholars that were in the state of madhhab imams followed and entered the madhabs of the other imams that they regarded as more learned than themselves or the madhab of the imams that had made the same ijtihads as themselves in the same issues. Besides, none of the madhhab mujtahids said, “We founded a madhhab; follow us and accept our madhabs; call that madhhabs by our names.” and called people to their madhhabs. They only taught the people who came to their lessons the religious sciences and tried to answer the questions that they were asked. When they were asked about the judgment of the religion about an issue, they would answer it. The students who learned from them, the scholars who accepted their words and ijtihads and the people followed them. Thus, their words and ijtihads became a madhhab.   

Those holy people were always free from subjective thoughts when they made ijtihad. They did not have egoism and conceit in science. They accepted the truth and the good things no matter where they found them. 

The efforts of the students had a great effect on the formation of the madhhabs based on the ijtihads of the mujtahids. Therefore, some students of the mujtahids compiled and classified the ijtihads of their teachers and transformed them into a system; however, many students could not be so successful.

Many madhhabs that formed in the beginning could not continue when their students and followers decreased; they exist in the books, now. Today, four of the Ahl as-Sunnah madhhabs exist. They are Imam Abu Hanifa and Hanafi madhhab, Imam Malik and Maliki madhhab, Imam Shafii and Shafii madhhab, and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Hanbali madhhab.

1. Ibn Majah, Fitan:8.
2. Musnad, 1:379.
3. Tirmidhi, Ahkam:3; Abu Dawud, Aqdiyya:11; Ibn Majah, Manasik:38.

Mehmed Paksu İbadet Hayatımız

Alawite is indeed neither a denomination nor a madhhab. It emerged as a tariqah based on love for people descending from the Prophet.

As for the historical development of the issue, the emergence of Alawite as a tariqah took place as follows:

Tamerlane took the thirty thousand captives that he had captured in Anatolia after defeating Bayazid I, the Sultan of Ottoman Empire, to Iran. He settled them in Ardabil. In the course of time, they affiliated to Sheikh Ali, who was known as the sheikh of Ardabil and was Shah Ismail’s grandfather, and took lessons from him. After some time, when Tamerlane visited the Sheikh of Ardabil and asked him if he wanted anything from him, the sheikh said: “I do not want anything. I only want you to set the Turkish captives you brought from Anatolia free.” Tamerlane accepted the wish of the sheikh with pleasure and set them free. For this reason, the captives’ love for the sheikh increased. Some of these followers of the sheikh returned to Anatolia and some of them stayed in Ardabil.

 

The Sheikh of Ardabil stayed in touch with his disciples who returned to Anatolia. As the tariqah of the Sheikh of Ardabil was based on love for Hazrat Ali, people who attended this tariqah were totally fascinated by the love of Hazrat Ali. For this reason, they were called “Alawi”. In fact, these captives’ ancestors and the captives themselves were followers of Ahl Sunnah before they had contact with this tariqah. After they deepened their involvement, they totally entered into Ardabil lodge’s service. They tried to obey all orders of the lodge completely. These disciples gave their taxes, charity and alms to Ardabil. Moreover, some people who were sent by Ardabil and called the “khalifa” of the Sheikh gathered money from people in the name of “nazir (votive)” and “sadaqah (charity) and send it to Iran secretly. 

 

The lodge of the Sheikh of Ardabil was expanding and its disciples were increasing in number day by day. The real aim of this sheikh was indeed to gain reign through religion, to transfer from being sheikh to shah by increasing his disciples in Iran and Anatolia. However, before he could reach his aim, his son Sheikh Junaid took over his place. He pursued his father’s secret aim too. Jihanshah, the sovereign of Iran at that time, felt this secret aim and expelled him out of Iran. Upon this, Sheikh Junaid came to Anatolia. His stay in Anatolia which lasted sixteen years brought lots of disciples to his tariqah. As he wandered around not only with the title of sheikh but also “sayyid (descendant of Prophet Mohammad)” he gathered more followers than he expected.

Now the lodge of Ardabil was very strong in Anatolia and it had a large circle that could not be overlooked. Sheikh Junaid had a similar end to his father’s. He was replaced by his son too and his son Sheikh Haidar pursued the same aim, too. Despite all his efforts and ambition, he could not reach his political goal, either. Finally, his son Shah Ismail unfortunately managed to make his father’s and grandfathers’ dream come true. When he was 13 years old, he waged war against Akkoyunlu State, which ruled over Iran at that time, with an army consisting of disciples in Anatolia. He managed to defeat the ruler of Akkoyunlu and succeeded to the throne, making his way under the name of religion, and he founded the state of Safawi. Besides, Shah Ismail did not relinquish Anatolia. He tried to strengthen his influence on Anatolia by sending there khalifs from time to time. Such activities continued to increase day by day until Caldiran Battle.

After this battle, definite borders were determined between Iran and the Ottoman State. So the connection between the disciples in Ardabil and Anatolia was broken. As a result of it, the disciples in Anatolia gradually grew away from the influence of their sheikhs. The disciples of this lodge in Anatolia wrongly thought that other Muslims except themselves did not love the family and descendants of the Prophet, because of the influence of Ardabil lodge. That behavior and attitude of theirs resulted in apathy between them and other Muslims. This apathy turned to a separation in the course of time.

 

As a result of this controversy, Anatolian Turks who followed the lodge of Ardabil stayed away from madrasah (Islamic theological school) could not learn many judgments related to the creed and worshipping properly. They contented themselves only with the teachings which passed over from ancestors to descendants. And other Muslims could not have close contact with them and could not fulfill their responsibility for them properly. The apathy between them grew more and more with immoderate discussions and imprudent criticism and attitudes and eventually it turned to a deep disunity. And when the negligence of governors was added to it, a disagreement amongst Anatolian Muslims emerged in the form of Sunni and Alawi.

In fact, it is religiously unobjectionable for a Muslim or a tariqah to base their characters on love for Hazrat Ali. It is totally unobjectionable to deem Hazrat Ali and the family of the Prophet as a guide on condition that one does not offend other Companions, performs their prayers under the light of the Quran and Sunnah, fast and fulfill other responsibilities. Frankly, a real Alawi, who knows the Quran and sunnah and lives accordingly, recognizes only Allah as god. S/he knows him/herself as a member of Islam, Our Prophet as the last prophet and the Quran as the last heavenly book.

 

The only way to abolish this artificial controversy is to come under the light of the Quran and accept it as the only criterion. As a matter of fact, Allah orders all Muslims to get together around the Quran, stating the following in the Quran: “Hold on tightly to Allah’s rope and do not separate.”

 

Muslims’ union and unity can only be established in this way, and controversies can be abolished only with its principles. It is only possible to stay away from all fake beliefs in this way.

 

Statements about Allah in the Quran are capable of persuading all people. Ordinary people are charmed by the simplicity of its declaration and scientists adore its eloquence and fluency. Hearts become satisfied by reciting it” and scientists of all levels meet their need for believing with it and reach maturity in mind by following it.

The following is stated in the Quran: “Verily, this Quran leads people to the truest way.” (al-Isra, 9)

 

One will learn how to enter the circle of belief by believing in what way and how to stay in the circle of Islam by performing what kinds of deeds and avoiding what kinds of things from the Quran and Sunnah. 

 

As the criteria for all Muslims are the Quran and Sunnah, a Muslim should evaluate and balance all humanly thoughts, all claims and all beliefs according to the Quran, and to Hadith which is its interpretation at first degree.

There are great diversities between Islamic and Christian schools of law. The Islamic schools are of the same opinion regarding the basic principles of belief and worshipping. As for the Christian schools, they concluded to confutation and misguidance of one another; each one became virtually a separate religion. There had been long lasting wars among them.

The underlying ground of the difference between the Islamic and Christian schools is the form of emergence of these schools of law.

We see that Islamic schools are based on three main sources:

The first one is the Quran. The schools came forth out of the various commentary of the verses open to different independent judgments of the same Quran.

As for Christianity, there are many versions of the Bible. The number of the gospels going up to seventy was decreased to only four in the Iznik meeting. It became almost inevitable that the separate schools originating from various Bibles came into existence just like a completely new religion.

Hadith forms the second basis for it. The messenger of Allah himself made new interpretations (ijtihads) on the Law, and these independent judgments became significant sources for mazhab leaders. Hazrat Eesa (Jesus) has not made any independent judgments on the Bible.

The third source is the interpretations by the companions of the Prophet. Some of these judgments were made when the Prophet was alive and they were welcomed by him. Upon the permission of the Messenger of Allah for the scholars of his companions to make independent judgments on the Law, the companions made plenty of interpretations. And those commentaries are the third important source for the schools of law.

Now you see that the sect leaders made independent judgments on some new matters not explicitly explained by those three sources. And they constitute only ten percent of the Shari'a.

As for Christianity, no interpretation of the law attributed to apostles is in question.

Since this is the case, clergymen were devoid of those three sources mentioned above and they were free to make any statements in accordance with their own pleasures, assumptions and even sometimes their benefits and as a result, diverse schools of law which are contrary to each other emerged.

Christianity was employed in the hands of the spiritual leaders as a means of tyranny and oppression.

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi stated this point as follows:

For a long time the Christian religion and particularly the Catholic Church, had been a means of domination and despotism in the hands of the upper and ruling classes. It was by that means that the upper class perpetuated its influence over the ordinary people. And since it was the means of oppressing the patriots, who were those who were awakened among the common people and were called Jacobins, and was the means of oppressing the freedom-seeking thinkers, who attacked the despotism of the upper class tyrants, and since for nearly four hundred years it had been considered to be a cause, through revolutions in Europe, of overturning the stability of social life, the Catholic Church had been attacked, not in the name of irreligion, but by the other Christian sects.

On the other hand, the principle think firstly and thereafter believe is dominant in Islam. Unlike Islam, Christianity is prevailed by the superstition you must believe without any contemplation, and then you must not reckon either. Since the religion is contrary to the decrees of the reason in Christianity. Moreover, deep thinking about the faith is unbelief. The advice by one of the spiritual leaders of Christian is never take the mind as your guidance on the grounds that the religion is opposite to the reasoning as a whole.

Islam enjoins to accept something after thorough proof and evidence. As for Christians, it is in vain engaging yourself in the evidence. Those occupying themselves with evidence are belittled. The priests were never able to satisfy the mind with the suppositions they indoctrinated for the sake of religion, and failed to soothe the conscience. They managed to fool only the ones incapable of discerning what is good and bad.

Badiuzzaman said the following in his work entitled Damascus Sermon:
We Muslims, who are students of the Qur'an, follow proof; we approach the truths of belief through reason, thought, and our hearts. We do not abandon proof in favor of blind obedience and imitation of the clergy like some adherents of other religions. He advises in one of his ,works, do not let every word uttered penetrate into your hearts. Here are the words I have said to you. Let them remain in the hands of your imagination; weigh them on the scale. If they turn out to be gold, keep them in your hearts.
When the truths put forward by the leading interpreters and guides of Islamic law are analyzed, it will be confirmed that those truths are based on the reasonable and transmitted evidence.

All of the four sects are righteous and truthful. Thus, it is wrong to say that one sect is superior to others.

There is a unique garment suitable for each season. There is a medicine for each disease. Likewise, the rules may change with respect to change of the centuries; the judgments may change depending on the traditions, lifestyles and abilities of the communities. We know that, different prophets and rules were sent to each nation before Islam.

Before our Prophet (PBUH), the mankind used to live far away from each other, used to have quite different lifestyles; they were mostly like bedouins. Therefore the religious rules that were sent were suitable for their situations. So much so that, different prophets were sent with different religions at the same time.

After the coming of our Prophet (PBUH), the mankind gained a high position of abilities, lifestyle and understanding. There had been many revolutions and changes in the religious and social status of people. So, the mankind was enabled to be taught by one teacher and to have a unique teaching. Therefore, several prophets were no longer necessary. However, since the lifestyles were not suddenly unified, different sects were still necessary.

If the majority of the mankind were at the same level in terms of education, culture and lifestyle like the students of a high school, it could be possible to mention the unification of the sects. However, the current state of the humanity is not appropriate for it.
As for the reason of ramification of the sects, Bediuzzaman exemplifies the issue as follows:

A certain amount of water is evaluated in five different ways for five different patients:

For one of them, it is a medicine, it is medically compulsory to use. For another, it is like a poison, so it is medically forbidden to drink. For another, it is less harmful, so it is just disliked medically. For another, it is good without harming, then, it is a sunnah medically. And for the last one, it is neither good  or bad, so for him, it is simply allowed to drink. As you see here, one piece of truth differs here severally. All of them are true.  Is it possible for you to say: “ Water is merely a medicine, it is compulsory, nothing else.”?

Likewise, the divine rules differ depending on sects and the practitioners through the divine wisdom. It differs rightfully and each way is right and useful.1

Muslims living in different regions of the world, follow one of the four sects. A Muslim can follow one of those righteous sects, practice his deeds and worships according to the instructions of that sect. It is not compulsory for a Muslim to abide by one certain sect till death. Therefore, it is allowed to change the sect if desired. For example, a practitioner of the Hanafi sect may choose the Shafii sect afterwards and vice versa.

However, one must know the rules of the new sect he/she follows in order to perform the worships properly. For example, if a Shafii sect member changes to Hanafi, he should at least know the musts of the ablution (wudu), the cases that annul the ablution, the musts of the prayer (salat). Otherwise, he/she might perform these duties with flaws.

It is possible to change the sect; one may use a preference of another sect if he/she may not find a solution in his/her sect. It is permissible. However, it must not stem from a personal urge or the pleasure of imitation. It must be out of a necessity and dire need. A person who uses the rulings of another sect, must consider the following points:

First: If a certain deed is to be imitated in accordance with another sect, then that deed must not be done before. For example, if a practitioner of the Shafii sect remembers that he touched his wife before performing the prayer and still performs the prayer following the Hanafi sect and saying “It is OK in Hanafi” , that worship is not valid.

Second: An imitator should not resort to combining the different applications that ease the conditions in different sects. Such an act called “talfik” which means to do the opposite things in two sects. It is not permissible. For example, one who has ablution according to Hanafi sect is regarded to have ablution even if he does not utter the intention for it. becasue because intention is not a must for ablution in Hanafi. However, the same nam should wipe one fourth of his head according to Hanafi. Hoıwever, less than one fourth is enough in Shafii. If this man wipes less than one fourth of his head abiding by the Shafii, then this ablution is not licit. It is called talflik, which is not permissible.2

Nonetheless, it is a pious and praised deed to act with respect to harder options of the sects. For example, if a Hanafi sect follower touches his wife, his ablution is still valid but invalid for Shafii. However, if this man renews his ablution through imitating Shafii sect, it is a pious act. Similarly, if a Shafii sect follower renews his ablution when he bleeds, it is a sign of his piety.
 Likewise, it is a pious and meritorious act to imitate the practice of other sects about the prayers (dua) and similar supererogatory worships which do not take place in Hanafi sect.
 These points must be considered about the issues of ijtihad (the endeavor of a Moslem scholar to derive a rule of divine law from the Koran and Hadith without relying on the views of other scholars) and imitation:

-People are divided into three groups in imitating an Islamic sect:

First group: the scholars that are able to do ijtihad. These scholars may not imitate anyone else.

Second group: Although they are not at the level of absolute ijtihad, they are knowledgeable men that know the method of jurisdiction and by using the same methods, they can put forward different ideas on certain issues. They are divided into two main groups such as: mujtahid in sect and mujtahid in issues. (mujtahid is one who can do ijtihad)

The third group is the populace.

According to the scholars, the populace does not have a sect. Their sect is the fatwa (a religious edict) of the mufti (A Muslim scholar and interpreter of shari'a law, who can deliver a fatwa) because, a true imitation of a sect in only possible through knowing the views of it. It requires a deep knowledge to decide which sect’s view is more appropriate. It is obvious that it is a hard issue. It is true not only for the populace but also so-called scholars like us. (Ravdatu’t-talibîn, 4/115-shamila).

The issue of imitating the sects did not emerge depending on a certain scholar’s view. There is consensus about the rightfulness and appropriateness to sunnah of the four sects of Islam among the Islamic scholars. (See Al-Muflih, al-Furu’, 12/202-shamila) Therefore, we need to live our religious life by a certain rightful sect. Nevertheless, it is allowed to use an easier practice in another sect in case of dire need.

There is no certain ceremony required to change the sect. And there are no certain rules to fulfill to do it. The important point is to learn the rules of the sect and then live by them.

According to some scholars, there are some conditions of imitating a sect:

1. The imitated sect must be a righteous one which has a set of settled rules with true resources.

2. The imitator should know the scientific roots and methods of the considered issue.

3. The imitated issue must not be annulled by an official court or mufti.

4. Talfik (combining the easing rules of the sects) must be strictly avoided.

5. About the same issue, there must not be a practice opposing to it, while abiding by the same rule at another time.

6. The different rules of the sects must not be united. That is to say, one who does not renew his ablution when he touches a lady and when he bleeds, has no valid ablution according to both sects: Hanafi or Shafi.

Those conditions show that the sect of the populace is the fatwa of the scholars. Because all of these conditions require a scientific background.

References: 1) Badiuzzaman Said Nursi. Words  (Istanbul: Sözler Publications, 1987), p. 454-455.
2) Ibn Abidin, Raddu’l-Mukhtar. (Beirut: Ihyau’t-Turathi’l-Arabi) 1:51;
3) as-Sayyid Abi Bakr. Ianatu’t-Talibin. (Beirut: Ihyau’t-Turathi’l -Arabi) 4:219;
4) Mehmed Paksu İbadet Hayatımız (Our Worshipping Life)

Let us take a look at associations and collaborations in the world. If man had eyes in every point of his body, it would be useless. Different kinds of elements come together and the miracle called life comes out. Now if the eye said, “You should all be like me”, that word would be both useless and impossible. Then if all organs said, “Let our aim be one and let every part serve for the continuation of the body and life as far as we can.” it would be the best way to handle problems.
Moreover, different kinds of professions in societies can be evaluated in the same way as different sects in the military such as air, naval, and land forces.
Different congregations, orders and sects in the Religion can be seen like that. They are all like the different organs of the body. However, they should have the only aim: “To serve humanity for Allah’s sake.” When the aim is one, it does not matter what they call themselves.
Another important issue is about criticizing each other. Suppose that you asked someone who was the best mother in the world, there is no doubt that he would say she was his own mother. He is also right to answer like that. However, this answer does not mean that there are not any other good mothers in the world.
If one asked us which one was the best sect, profession, and way of behaving, we would say that it was ours because we believe like that. Others can also think like that. Then conflicts and enmities will disappear.

The religious congregations are like organs which try to maintain the spiritual life of the societies. As long as they have the same aim, they will do everything for Allah’s sake.
Allah is the Creator of our lives and He determines the way through which we go. That is, whatever is necessary for a human being to be called as human being is determined by Allah. There is no need for a different authority for it. For this reason, the Institution of Prophethood, which put the rules set up by Allah into a system and made them clear,  has also been founded and directed by Allah.
Therefore, firstly the Qur’an and then the Sunnah is our guide. Our true sects which benefit from those two Sources are also religious institutions taking us closer to Allah. Basic rules and principles suggested by them are based on the Qur’an and Hadith. For this reason, they are indispensable for Islam and the Religion, because when a Mujtahid says a word, he does not speak for himself; he speaks and gives Fatwa on behalf of Allah; he set up his way of thinking based on the idea “I understand this like this from the Qur’an.”
As for religious congregations, they are considered from the Religion if their aim is Allah’s consent and Ihsan (perfection in worship) because scholars who lead these sects act according to this idea “How can I gain the consent of Allah? How can I direct these people to the True Way?” So, we should also consider those kinds of people from the Religion, because their aim, in every kind of word they say, is Allah’s consent and they act in accodance with  the rules set up by Allah.
What they talk is based on the Qur’an and Hadith. If those kinds of people talk in accordance with the Religion’s rules, not on their own, of course, they will talk about divine warnings which save Muslims from indifference and direct them to being serious. They will state that some kinds of disasters and difficulties which occur to people are because they reluctantly serve for the Religion.
Besides, while a part of the Qur’an and Shariah talk about rewards, the other part of them also talk about punishment for sins committed. If they are said by an Islamic scholar and he says and inform them that they will be punished because of what they have done, it will completely be by the Shariah.

Such a marriage may result difference of opinion. So you must be careful.

Shiah are also Muslims. If a shiah calls himself a Muslim and if one does not reject obeying Allah laws, it is allowable to marry him. A Muslim man can only marry a Muslim woman or a woman from the People of the Book. If a shiah woman believes like Muslims believe, it is also permissible to marry her. The difference of the sects does not matter in marriage. It matters whether one is Muslim or not.

Since a Muslim man can only marry a Muslim woman, first we should tell what a Muslim should be like. A Muslim is a person who accepts all basic rules of the religion of Islam and does not reject any of them. Namely, a Muslim is a person who accepts the Islamic rules like Salah (prayers), fasting, Hajj, ablution (wudu), etc and its prohibitions like adultery, alcohol, and interest. Whoever does not accept the things mentioned above or a part of it, he/she cannot be called Muslim and a Muslim cannot marry him or her. If they marry, their marriage is illegitimate. It does matter whether they are Sunni or Shiah.

It means that the criterion of getting married is being a Muslim. Unfortunately, today in our country and abroad, many Muslim women get married to men who are not Muslims without finding out about them and the judgment of Islam regarding the issue and they attract the curse of Allah over themselves.

Is marriage between Shia and Sunni is permissible in Islam?

The First answer: Since a Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim man, we should define “Muslim” first. A Muslim is a person who accepts all definite rulings of  the religion of Islam and does not reject any of them. That is, he is the person who believes in and accepts the orders such as salat (prayer), zakat (obligatory alms), hajj (pilgrimage), wudu (ablution), ghusl (full ablution), etc. and prohibitions such as fornication, alcoholic drinks, interest and so on. However, a person who does not accept all or some of the things specified above is not regarded as a Muslim and marrying him is not permissible. If a marriage has taken place, then that marriage life is illicit. It does not matter whether he is Sunni or Shi’a.

Then, the criterion in marrying is Islam. Unfortunately, many Muslim women within the country or abroad marry non-Muslim men without asking the circumstances and learning Islam’s decision and make themselves deserving of Allah’s curse till doomsday. (Halil GÜNENÇ, Günümüz Meselelerine Fetvalar (Fatwas For the Current Matters) II. 119)

The Second answer: Questions about that issue have been asked and answers have been expected for some time. First of all, I want to specify a particular point.

I will try to answer the question within that concept.

Firstly, we should specify what Alawism (adherence to Shi’a beliefs and practices) is so that we would be successful in making a decision. What is Alawism, really? Well, that is the question we seek an answer for. If we can specify what Alawism is, then the matter is solved and we can answer whether marrying a Shi’a is permissible or not. However, the Alawism concept in our country is not single and clear.

- Alawism cannot be out of the bounds of the Qur’an. It cannot be comprehended in contrast to sunnah. It cannot be interpreted in opposition to the Prophet’s way of living. All religious orders such as salat, sawm (fasting), hajj, zakat take place in Alawism. People claiming the opposite are those who want to use Alawism as a tool to realize their aims. One should not be up to their tricks and should not show respect to people who want to show Alawism outside Islam.

If Alawism is like that, there is no problem. We regard them as our brothers of religion; we even ignore some of their mistakes and deficiencies since we all can have defects and imperfections in our deeds…    
However, if Alawism is not like that but like some people claim it to be… Namely: If salat, sawm and zakat are lacking; and if they regard their worship only as a matter of heart and they deny five daily prayers; and if they fundamentally show disrespect to rightly-guided caliphs of Allah’s Messenger and have the idea of keeping enmity alive by carrying some historical events to present time; especially if they do not accept fard ghusl and they do not consider it right to have full ablution after janabah (the state of a person after sexual intercourse)… then it is not religiously permissible for people who accept those mentioned above and who do not to come together and it is not logically possible for them to set a peaceful marriage and live happily in a lovely manner together. Nowadays, some difficulties occur in getting along with even for people who share the same culture, then to what extent it can be realistic to consider that people from different cultures can carry on a happy family life in peace. Therefore,  I say: “We should first detect how parties consider Alawism!”

If they consider the Qur’an as the holy book fundamentally, if they accept the Qur’an’s meaning is explained in sunnah and if they take Allah’s Messenger’s and his family’s way of living as an example, then there is no difference between us fundamentally. It can be possible to tolerate other differences.

A person who accepts fards is a believer and a person who does not accept them is a denier. Determining it can be possible by meeting and talking. To give judgment before meeting and talking is having prejudice.
I want to indicate another important point:

One who interprets Alawism as within Islam is our coreligionist and who regards it outside Islam is our citizen. We want to live in mutual peace with our citizens. This is a necessity of Islam.

Alawism can not be outside the Qur’an. It cannot be comprehended in contrast to sunnah. It can not be interpreted in opposition to the Prophet’s way of living. All religious orders such as salah, sawm, hajj, zakat take place in Alawism. People claiming the opposite are those who want to use Alawism as a tool to realize their aims. One should not be up to their tricks and should not show respect to people who want to show Alawism outside Islam... It is our duty to love and esteem people whom the Prophet deems worthy to be his son-in-love and father-in-love.

Aile İlmihali, Cihan Yayınları (Catechism for Family, Cihan Publications)

Shias are divided into many categories and most of them expressed ideas outside of the Islamic line.

Shias are divided into 22 sub-sects. These are:

1. Sabaiyyah Sect: The founder of this sect is Abdullah bin Saba. Basis of their beliefs are; Ascribing Uluhiyyat (praying and obeying only to …) to Hazrath Ali (as) and his descendants. They claim that Hazrath Ali (as) is not death, the one who has died was a Satan incognito as Ali (as). Hazrath Ali (as) ascended to heaven. Thunder is his voice; flash of lightening is his scourge’s clatter.

2. Kamiliyyah Sect: According to this sect, Imamate (duties and rank of Imam) is a nur (heavenly light). One other attribute of imam is prophet at the same time. These people claim that sahaba (Companions of Prophet) are unbelievers.

3. Ulyaniyyah Sect: The followers of this sect who pray and obey to Hazrath Ali (as) and to his descendants claim that Hazrath Ali (as) sent Hazrath Mohammad (pbuh) as a messenger.

4. Mughapriyyah Sect: They say that Allah (swt) has a shape of a mortal man and carries a crown, which is made of a heavenly light and believe so many other outdated superstitions that would even amaze Satan himself.

5. Mansuriyyah Sect: “Imams are blameless; prophets are not free from mistakes. Imams are higher in ranks.” They believe such like superstitions and myths.

6. Hatabiyyah Sect: According to them world is eternal. There is no Hell. They do not accept Haram (anything that is prohibited by faith), or Halal (anything that is permissible under Islam).

7. Hashimiyyah Sect: They think of Allah in shape of a human.

8. Numaniyyah Sect: They are also called as Sataniyyah Sect. Just like Hashimiyyah Sect, they think of Allah in shape of a human.

9. Yonusiyyah Sect: They claim that Allah sits on a throne and the angels always see Him.

10. Nasriyyah Sect: They claim that Allah penetrated into Hazrath Ali (as) and his descendants. That is to say they became a united whole.

11. Canahiyyah Sect: They drivel by claiming that Allah’s spirit was with Hazrath Adam and passed to the other Prophets and to the twelve Imam.

12. Gurabiyyah Sect: These sect’s members by defending an opininion of Hazrath Ali’s (as) likeness to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) claim that Angel Gabriel revealed to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by mistake.

13. Zarrariyyah Sect: They believe that all the other attributes of Allah except the Life Attribute came into being afterwards.

14. Zarramiyyah Sect: They say that Imamet came down from Ali (as) to his son Mohammad Hanafi and from him to the others.

15. Mufavizzah Sect: They are in dark by saying that Allah created Prophet Mohammad and he created the heavens and earth and the universe.

16. Badahiyyah Sect: Their situation is much weirder than the others are. They claim that Allah created his creations without thinking of their pasts and futures.

17. Banaiyyah Sect: Just like Nasriyyah Sect they believe in becoming one (Allah and Hazrath Ali and his descendants)

18. Salahiyyah Sect: They are mutazillah (man is the owner of his acts and they negate the effects of fate) in faith, Hanafis (school of the oldest of the four schools of thought or jurisprudence within Sunni Islam. The Hanafi sect named after its founder, Abu Hanifa) in practice.

19. Sulaymaniyyah Sect: They accept Hazrath Abu Bakr’s (as) and Hazrath Omar’s (as) Imamate however reject of their being imam prior to Hazrath Ali.

20. Imamiyyah Sect: According to them, Hazrath Mohammad (pbuh) appointed Hazrath Ali (as) as imam personally and he was the one who can choose the following imams because of Hazrath Mohammad’s will.

21. Garrudiyyah Sect: They claim that the words of our Prophet about Imamet clearly refer to Hazrath Ali (as) and blame Companions of Prophet of being blasphemous.

22. Ismailiyyah Sect: By the followers of this sect under the cover of religion, it had been tried to be founded a kingdom. Under the leadership of Ubaydullah whom was one of the descendants of ibn-i Meymoon it became an Empire spreading from Damascus to Morocco. After 270 years of ruling, it fell in the year 570 (Islamic calendar). These are also called as Batinis.

They, by keeping their imams distinct from others consider them as being approved by the divine enlightenment. According to them, their imams are blameless, they do not make mistakes, and they do not sin. They cannot be responsible for their acts because they know things, which anybody cannot.

It is haram to talk about the Companions unreasonably and offensively. A person who speaks like that is called ahl al-bid’a. It is very dangerous in terms of religion to disdain and insult especially the four caliphs. Those people cannot be called unbelievers but they are not from Ahl as-Sunnah, either.

Imama Ghazali mentioned Rafidis not Shiites in his book “Ihya”, pointing out that they insulted the Companions and added that their belief of “infallible Imam” was wrong. Besides, he stated that he wrote a book called “al-Mustazhari” by making use of the book entitled “Kashful-Asrar wa Hatkul-Astar” written by Qadi Abu Tayyib and that he explained the state of Rafidis there. (see Ihya, 1/489-Shamila)

Ghazali rejected the wrong thoughts of Shiites as all Ahl as-Sunnah scholars did. However, as it is emphasized above, the group that is targeted is Rafidis, one of the extreme groups of Shiite.

What we need to do today is to put forward the brotherhood, which is the common ground of belief, without arguing about the issues that are controversial  for the sake of the goodness of the Islamic world.

The Emergence of Shiism

There appeared quite a new era in the whole of humanity with the Qurans being sent down, which is the greatest torch through the way of Allah. People were rejoicing at embracing the True Religion, which was their souls most natural need. They reached to the Unity from polytheism, to light from darkness, to truth from superstitions, to knowledge from ignorance. The Qurans vital principles took them to both material and spiritual elevation any moment.

In the era of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), Islam established its absolute sovereignty in Mecca, Medina, and Hijaz and in neighboring lands. The age of ignorance and darkness have been replaced by that of bliss and light.

With the magnificent conquests that were conducted at the times of Abu Bakr and Umar within a short time, the conquest of Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and Persia became successful.

This wonderful expansion caused the enemies of Islam, especially Jews, to increase their envy and hatred against Islam. Jews were horrified in the face of the advancement that Islam enjoyed within such a short period; they were bursting with envy. Furthermore, the conversion of most Jewish religious groups drove them crazy. This rapid and brilliant spread of Islam by all means should have been stopped.

It was quite necessary that the conspiracy, which once was organized against Christians, must be done for Muslims this time. They negotiated the matter and put Ibn-i Sebe on the stage. Abdullah Ibn-i Sebe was the chief rabbi and a master manipulator.

Ibn-i Sebe based his destruction plans on mainly two principles. First, he would prevent the advancement of Islam by causing diversity among Muslims and second, he would seek the ways for a diversity of opinions among Muslims, which would continue until the end of the world by inserting superstitions into the Islamic faith and creed. In order for these two ends to be achieved, he would set up covert groups and through them, he would conduct intense activities that would first debilitate and then obliterate the spiritual ties among Muslims such as the spirit of unity, love, brotherhood. There would be an immediate summing-up the situation just after every stage of mischief- making, the planned goals and received results would be evaluated, there would be new plans to achieve further aims under changing and developing conditions and these plans would be put into practice.

Ibn-i Sebe fully achieved his first goal for he caused disunity and battles within Muslims.

Ibn-i Sebe was approaching his main objective through these inside battles. For his main objective was to have Islam gone corrupt by introducing superstitions into the Islamic creed.

All fighting Believers might have made peace soon and re-set up the Islamic unity by coming together. It was vital that there be a controversy among them, which would continue until the end of the world, and disunite them in respect of faith and divide them into opposing parties. The most important task now to do was to make them swerve from the right way by inserting religious superstitions. The abuse of the love of the Prophets Family was the first thing to resort to by Ibn-i Sebe. He appeared to be the most zealous adherent to the Family of Prophet. He propagated that Ali needed to be incumbent of Caliphate and it was usurped from him unjustly. He attempted to distort the religion of Islam from its creed of Unity, as is the case in Christianity, by rendering Ali and his children (may Allah be pleased with them) so-called A Dynasty of Gods. Finally, a group of people headed by Ibn-i Sebe came before Ali and said to him, You are our God, you are our Lord. Ali had some of them burnt to death. He then decided not to have him burnt fearing that his death would provoke further mischief and weakness since he has many adherents in the army. He exiled him to Medayin, the former centre of government of Persia.

Unfortunately, Medayin was a very appropriate place for Ibn-i Sebes perverted ideas to flourish. Ibn-i Sebe met Kharijites (1) here, who in the past fled from Ali, and found their chief Ibn-i Evfa. Realizing that Ibn-i Evfa was about to take action against Ali, he told him, You cannot defeat Ali with such an action; on the contrary, you will be defeated. When Ibn-i Evfa asked him about his opinion, he said that they could finish him off with three assassins.

After this meeting, they agreed on the assassination of Ali, Muawiya, and Amr Ibnul-Âs (May Allah be pleased with them). To this end, they sent three assassins. Three Companions of the Prophet (PBUH) were to be killed on the seventeenth day of Ramadan while they were performing their morning prayer. Through Divine Determining, Muawiya and Amr Ibnul Âs survived these assassination attempts but the assassin named Ibn-i Mulcem succeeded in wounding Ali with a poisonous sword, which would soon occasion his martyrdom.

Having sent Ibn-i Mulcem on his way to kill Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), Ibn-i Sebe sent Ibn-i Meymoon together with a couple of men of his to the city of Kufa. Ibn-i Meymoon there was to disseminate superstitions such as Ali has never died, he has gone to heavens. He is over the clouds now. Soon he will be back and distribute justice to the whole of the world with his sword

Ibn-i Sebe together with his accomplices laid down the plans of treachery that they would carry out in Persia and they immediately set to work. The social conditions of that time were quite favorable for their putting their plots into practice.

Islam spread through a very large area within such a short time. It was an extraordinarily difficult task for a newly established Islamic state to convey all meanings and subtleties, wisdom and truths to the peoples who recently converted to Islam within such a large geography, and to make those who have different ways of life co-exist in the Islamic melting pot. People were converting to Islam in large numbers. Although this situation gladdened Muslims, but on the other hand, this spiritual dough could not be kneaded properly, Muslims were not brought up as properly as expected of them and consequently Muslims could not reach integrity as desired of them in terms of ideal way of sensing and of understanding. The masses were like uncultivated soil. This situation especially made it deeply felt in Persia.

The new converts were not fully free from their old fallacies. They deemed it rather difficult to embrace the pure, clear, unadulterated truths of Islam as they were which were far from being illusions, falsifications and superstitions since these people had been exposed to the influence of superstitions and false beliefs which dated back hundreds of years. Islam was not truly being comprehended by these pious people and the true religion was not being implanted in hearts and feelings exactly. As a psychological demand, they wished to continue their previous beliefs, customs, and common usages along with Islam. On the other hand, the institution of Caliphate was unable to conduct the services of warning and guidance properly. The service to establish Islam in those places with its all institutions and to remove their suspicions and hesitations was coming to a halt. For Islam spread through a large area, most of the Companions of the Prophet (PBUH) had died inner turmoil, some chose a life of a recluse, and some other were too old to interfere with the social life.

As a result of neglecting this sacred task, these new places remained unowned for a long time. With the first enthusiasm and knowledge they received during the conquest, they could not fully understand the truths with regard to the Quran and faith. Therefore, they did not reach a point to distinguish between true and false, superstition and truth.

A mischief-making society, Jews, achieved to make use of these social conditions.

Another important factor, which made it possible for Ibn-i Sebe to implant his evil ideas in Persia, was the psychological state of the people. Their inner worlds were prevailed by emotions rather than reasoning. Their hearts were vulnerable to myths and superstitions rather than truth. They could not analyze events within a harmony of logic and reasoning.

They were unable to stomach the demolition of their centuries-long dynasties and national prides by Arabs, whom they once were regarding as slaves, also showed great envy in the sense of feelings though not in the sense of reasoning.

Ibn-i Sebe masterfully made use of these factors. He gathered his friends around him and told them: We have just started the war. Know that this is the start of a war among Muslims, which would continue until the end of the world. We shall sanctify Ali and have others to do the same. Sometimes we shall call him god, sometimes prophet, sometimes we shall tell that Caliphate was incumbent on Ali, but Abu Bakr, Umar, and Osman usurped this right of his.

After taking this decision, Ibn-i Sebe and his fellow men commissioned their men around to spread these ideas. These men inculcated people with their lies such as, Ali should have been the Caliph, he and His sons deserve it more than anybody else. This right was usurped from them. Three other caliphates, especially Umar, opposed the will of Allah by usurping this right In order to obey the will of Allah, we should take sides with Ali When these mass suggestions are accepted by the people, going further, they endeavored to insert the incarnation of God, which attributes divinity to human beings, into the Islamic creed. By trying to distort the Islamic belief from its right path, they started to disseminate a belief, which is diametrically opposite to the creed of Unity. The belief of The incarnation of God existed in old religions of Persians. Thus, this false belief enjoyed a quick popularity among them.

First, they attributed divinity to Ali (May Allah be pleased with him). Then they asserted that this divinity passed to his children and consequently there appeared a dynasty of gods in Persia.

On the death of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) Ibn-i Sebe commented that who died actually was not Ali but a devil taking on his form, he now went up the heavens and made a throne for himself over the clouds, by showing his death in the direction of the incarnation of God.

Eventually Shiism, which was first initiated in Egypt by the establishment of Sebeiyye Sect, started to grow and flourish in Persia. Then there emerged sub-sects out of this, which are more than twenty.

(1) Kharijites: These people are known to be the adversaries of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). These people disliked the policies of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and always exhibited a tough attitude towards him and his rule. Therefore, there always took place controversies between Ali and Kharijites.

Rational Evidences about the Necessity of Following a Madhhab

Unfortunately, this century contains many spiritual diseases. Spiritual diseases spread rapidly because it is the end of time; the people who lack the sciences that are like antidote catch these diseases and ruin their otherworldly lives.

One of these diseases is the disease of not having a madhhab (sect/denomination). You probably heard the following statement from many people: "I base my views on the Quran. I can deduce my own decree myself. Why should I be subject to a madhhab? Did the Prophet have a madhhab? My madhhab is the path of the Prophet; I do not follow any madhhabs."

You probably heard the statement above and similar ones from the people without a madhhab many times. As we have mentioned, it is the end of time when belief of people flies away like a bird and spiritual diseases surround people. 

As Feyyaz Internet Services, we regard it as a duty to prepare works that will protect belief and that will be a cure for spiritual diseases. We want the consent of our Lord when we did it. Our aim in this work is to stop this disease of not having any madhhabs, which threatens Muslims, to offer a cure to the hearts injured by this disorder and to show sane and just people how wrong the way of the unfortunate people who invite people to abandon madhhabs is.   

In this work, we will be guests of two imaginary friends and we will listen to the conversation between them. One of these friends is a person who does not follow any madhhabs and advocates having no madhhab. The other is a person who believes in the necessity of following a madhhab.

If anyone watches this work with his conscience, he will inshallah get rid of the disease of having no madhhab. In this work, the necessity of being subject to a madhhab is proved with the certainty of two plus two equals four. Help and assistance, guidance and salvation come from Allah. Now we are listening to the conversation of two imaginary friends.

A- I do not follow any madhhabs. I will not give up this view until I it is proved to me that it is necessary to be subject to a madhhab. You should know that I am very stubborn. It is not easy to convince me.

B- Do not worry! The truth is always victorious and superior no matter how stubborn you are. I will inshallah convince you and I will cause you to recover from the illness of having no madhhab with the permission of Allah. However, I would like something from you. Since qadar made us friends in this work, let us have a golden rule between us. This golden rule is as follows: Let mind and conscience be the referee between us. Let us talk to each other in order to discover the truth, not stubbornly. Let us not oppose each other stubbornly regarding what intellect and reason accept.  

A- All right! Let mind and conscience be the referee. I will captivate your mind and conscience and free you from the slavery of madhhab.

B- Let us start! I say, "Let the one who is right win." And I want you to listen to these words well. There are two different verses (signs) of Allah Almighty. The first one is the Quranic verses that come from His attribute of kalam. The second one is the verses (signs) created in this universe, which we call the book of the universe and which come from His attribute of power. Everything, from a bird to stars and from a butterfly to galaxies, is a sign of this second book: “the book of the universe”.

We cannot understand these signs in the universe, which is the second book, through our own mind; we need teachers to teach us the book of the universe.

For example, we refer to astronomers for signs like the sun, moon, stars, and galaxies written on the page of the sky and we learn from them what we wonder. We do not start to examine them by taking the telescope right away; and we do not judge based on our thoughts.

We also refer to marine scientists for fish, waves, corals, and other signs written in the sea and ask them about the facts related to them. We do not put on a diving suit and dive in the sea.

For the other signs written on the page of the earth, we refer to physicists, geographers, doctors, in short, the specialists of those scientists; and we need their knowledge.

Similarly, we have to refer to the specialists and scholars and we need them in order to understand the verses of the Quran, which is the first book, and the hadiths of the Prophet. The position of a person who tries to understand the Quran, which is the first book, without using those scholars as a guide is the same as that of a person who tries to understand the universe, which is the second book, without using scientists as a guide. Both of them will be wrong; they will decide based on their own thoughts.

A- You speak very persuasively and I think you are playing mind games. You almost convinced me with what you said. However, as I told you at the beginning, it is not easy to convince me.

B- There was a golden rule between us. The rule was as follows: Mind and conscience would be a referee between us. We would not oppose each other stubbornly regarding an issue that mind and conscience accepted.

A- Just a minute; you go too fast. Tell me what you said again; I will listen to you by using my mind and my conscience as the referee.

B- I say that we refer to scientists in order to understand the signs written in this book of the universe and we accept what they say because they have the right to speak regarding the issue. For example, a person who has not studied astronomy thinks that the sun is as big as an apple but an astronomer knows that the sun is bigger than the earth 1,300,000 times.

When a person who has not studied medical science looks at blood, he sees only something red but a doctor can see red blood cells, white blood cells and thrombocytes.

Similarly, when a person who has not studied engineering looks at a river, he sees only water but an engineer can see the dam behind it and the potential electric power in it.

When a person who is not aware of botany looks at a flower, he sees only the apparent beauty of it but a botanist can see the secrets inside that flower and write a book about it.

It is possible to increase the examples. The common point of all these examples is as follows: We can understand very few of the signs which Allah wrote in the book of the universe with His pen of power; therefore, we apply to a specialist of that science to reach the true knowledge.

Why do we not refer to a specialist in order to understand the verses of the Quran, which is the first book and regard it odd though we refer to a specialist in order to understand the signs written in the book of the universe? Is it not really strange that man who needs a guide even for the smallest worldly affair thinks that he does not need a guide and a teacher in order to understand the religion, which is the biggest thing in the world?

A- You are really pushing me and you are speaking logically. However, I will not surrender to you easily and be defeated immediately. Yes, you spoke nicely and logically. I accept that. However, you said: We refer to experts in order to understand the signs in the book of the universe. Why should we not do the same thing in order to understand the verses of the Quran?

In response to this, I say: I can deduce my own decree. I am an expert on this. The scholars of four madhhabs deduced decrees from the Quran and hadiths. The sources are obvious; so, I can do it myself.

B- A person cannot an expert by saying I am an expert. I want to ask you a question before we see whether you are a specialist or not:

A pharmacist makes drugs from flowers. Is it reasonable to climb mountains saying, "All drugs are made from flowers. Why should we buy them from a pharmacist’s"?

Yes, drugs are made from flowers and plants. This is true. However, it is necessary to study chemistry for years and to become a pharmacist, a specialist, a chemist. A person who tries to make drugs with the flowers he collects from the mountain without knowing chemistry will only harm himself.

Likewise, we have to learn the decrees of the Quran and the Sunnah, which are our spiritual drugs, and take them from mujtahid scholars, who are - so to speak -  the pharmacists of this issue. For, this knowledge was bestowed on them. That is, a person who decrees based on what he finds by leaving four madhhabs aside is like a person climbing the mountain to make drugs. Do you think this person is intelligent?

Or, this person is like a person who says, "All laws are available in the constitution book. If I read this book from the beginning to the end, I will become a professor of the constitution. I will not need to listen to the constitution professors anymore. "

Yes. This statement is meaningless; a person cannot become a professor of the constitution only by reading the constitution book. Similarly, a person cannot become a mujtahid by reading the translation of the Quran.

Or, this person is like a person who says, "I will discover the laws of physics on my own. I do not need to imitate Einstein and other physicists. They are humans like me. They used numerals and made calculations. I can do the same calculations using the same numerals and obtain the right results."

These are some true parts in this statement. Yes, Einstein is a human like him and he made calculations using numerals in his profession. What is wrong in this is that this person assumes that he is as talented as Einstein. The evidence that he is not as talented as Einstein is that history does not mention more than a few Einsteins. If it were so easy to be an Einstein, there would be thousands of people like Einstein. So, what matters is not numbers. What matters is obtaining the best results using those numerals.

Similarly, what matters is not reading the Quranic verses or hadiths. What matters is to deduce the right decree the Quran and hundreds of thousands of hadiths. This special talent was given to Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Malik, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and similar scholars.

You could be a good fiqh or tafsir scholar but you can never be a mujtahid. You can never reach the level of Abu Hanifa and the scholars like him. For, Allah bestowed something different upon them. It is not a talent that they obtained by working, but it is a gift of Allah.

A- I see that you are a hard nut to crack. I confess that I have difficulty in finding answers to what you say. I did not guess that this discussion would be so difficult. How do you find so many words?

B- You and people like you who do not accept madhhabs think that we have no words to say and no evidence to defend our case. That is why you think you are right. However, you should know that we have many words and irrefutable proofs regarding every issue that we defend. No matter what issue is in question regarding our profession, we will defeat, convince or silence our opponent.

A- However, it is hard to catch me. If you close a hole, I will escape from another hole. If you answer one question, I will come up with another.

B- If your skill is to escape from one hole to another, my skill is to close every hole. Let us see if you can find a hole to escape at the end of this discussion?

A- Now I have entered a hole and I am asking you the following question: I am also a scholar. Why should I not make ijtihad? What do I not have that they have?

B- Look how I will close the hole you are in now. However, listen carefully and use your mind and conscience as the referee! Here is the answer to your question:

The nature of truth is the same but its manifestations in individuals are different. For example, the fly also flies, but not like an eagle. Wheat also produces ears, but not like a tree. The mirror also shows the sun, but not like the ocean.

Just like these examples, the manifestations of the truth of ilm (knowledge) in individuals are different. Its manifestations on people like Abu Hanifa and the scholars similar to him are not the same as its manifestations on us in this century. Yes, both of them are ilm but there are great differences.

It is similar to this: Mathematics is taught in elementary school but engineers do not graduate from elementary school. For, the mathematics taught in elementary school is not enough for engineering. This century is elementary school compared to that century. Science is taught; scholars are raised but mujtahids are not raised. For, the elementary school of this century is not suitable for raising mujtahids. We will mention later what an unmatched ability mujtahid scholars have and why it is not possible to reach them. For now, I do not open this door and tell you only this: We apply to specialists in order to obtain correct information about the material world and the things in it; similarly, we have to apply to the specialists of the religion in order to reach correct information in religious issues. These specialists are mujtahid scholars.

A- You said a lot of things but I still do not understand why I cannot make ijtihad. What prevents it?

B- What prevents it is your inability to do this. Now I will tell you why you cannot make ijtihad from a different aspect. Your obstinacy will probably end after this.  

I am also a scholar. Why cannot I make ijtihad?

A- You uttered many things but I still do not understand this: “Why cannot I make ijtihad?”

B- What prevents it is your inability to do it. Now I will tell why you cannot make ijtihad from a different viewpoint. You will probably give up your stubbornness this way.  

In each profession, there are titles expressing ‘accumulation of knowledge’. Concepts like assistant, doctor, assistant professor, associate professor and professor are titles expressing accumulation of knowledge and competence of knowledge. Just as there are such titles in every profession so too are there titles showing levels and degrees of fiqh scholars in the science of fiqh. Each title indicates the level of knowledge of the fiqh scholar in that level. These titles and levels of knowledge are divided into seven. These levels are as follows:  

1- The level of Mujtahid fish-shar: This is the level of the scholars who are absolute mujtahids. These scholars introduced methods and rules in order to deduce decrees from the Quran, Sunnah, ijma (consensus) and qiyas (analogy), which are the four evidences; and they deduced decrees from them according to the rules they introduced. Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Malik and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal are the scholars in this level.

The 2nd level is the level of Mujtahid fil-madhhab: They are the scholars who are mujtahids in madhhab. In other words, they did not introduce methods and rules in order to deduce decrees but they deduced decrees according to the rules introduced by madhhab imams based on the four evidences. Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammad and similar scholars are in this level.

A- Do you mean Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad could not determine the rules of ijtihad and they imitated Abu Hanifa in ijtihad methodology?

B- Yes. Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad, the great scholars of Hanafi madhhab, imitated Abu Hanifa and made ijtihad according to the methods and rules he introduced. What did you think? Did you think it was very easy?

The 3rd level of fiqh scholars is the level of mujtahid fil-masala: They are scholars who can make ijtihad only in some issues. They deduce decrees according to the methods and principles of the madhhab related to the issues that the imam of the madhhab did not mention and make ijtihad. However, it is necessary to deduce this decree according to the rules of the madhhab. Imam Tahawi, Ahmad b. Umar, Imam Sarakhsi and similar scholars are in this level of the science of fiqh.

A- Do you mean Imam Sarakhsi cannot make ijtihad about an issue about which the imam of the madhhab made ijtihad?

B- Yes, that is right. Even a well-known scholar like Imam Sarakhsi, who is known as "Shams al-Aimma", that is, "Sun of the Imams", cannot put forward his own idea and cannot make ijtihad related to an issue about which the imam of the maddhab made ijtihad. He can make ijtihad according to the methods and principles determined by the imam of the madhhab only related to an issue about which the imam did not mention and make ijtihad. This religion has been maintained with this sensitivity. Would this religion have been maintained like this if everyone had decreed based on his own view? How do you and people like you dare to make ijtihad though Imam Sarakhsi, who is known as "Sun of the Imams", could not make ijtihad and could not act contrarily to the imam of the madhhab?  

The 4th level of fiqh scholars is the level of Ashab at-takhrij: They are scholars who are not in the level of ijtihad but who explain only a short and closed decree of muqtahids. They did not deduce decrees from evidences. Abu Bakr Ahmed b. Ali ar-Razi, known by the nickname al-Jassas, is a scholar in this level. Yes, the famous scholar al-Jassas is only a muqallid, that is, a scholar who imitated the imam of the madhhab and who could not make ijtihad. I wonder if you are more knowledgeable than al-Jassas since you dare to do something that he could not do. You should know that this daring comes from your ignorance and the courage given by your ignorance.

A- I have difficulty in understanding. Why could al-Jassas not do something that I can do easily? Why did he follow the imam of a madhhab?

B- He did not and could not do it because he knew his place. He did not overstep the limits. And he was afraid of being exposed to the wrath of Allah by making mistakes. For this reason, he left the task of making ijtihad to the fiqh scholars in the first three levels, who were more competent than him. However, you and people like you do not know your place and you are not worried that you could make mistakes and be exposed to the wrath of Allah. You speak based on your own thoughts and you think you are superior to scholars like al-Jassas.  

The 5th level of fiqh scholars is the level of Ashab at-tarjih: They are scholars who can choose among one of the several narrations reported from mujtahids. They are muqallids. Muqallid means a person who imitates. The scholars of Ashab at-tarjih did not make ijtihad in fiqh decrees; they imitated imams of madhhabs and acted based on their ijtihads. Their quality is that they can choose one of the several ijtihads made related to the same issue. That is, if there were a few opinions related to an issue, they could act based on the one that they preferred among those views. Abul Hasan Quduri and similar scholars are in this level. Just think about it: A scholar like Abul Hasan Quduri cannot make ijtihad and can only prefer one of the different views. How can you make ijtihad so easily and speak so blatantly?

The 6th level of fiqh scholars is Ashab at-tamyiz: Those who are in this level are also muqallid and are subject to a madhhab imam. Their quality is that they can list and write various narrations about an issue according to their strength. They do not include any rejected narrations in their books.

As for the 7th level of fiqh scholars, it is the level of Ashab al-fatwa: I want you to pay particular attention to this level. The scholars in this level are muqallids who can distinguish weak narrations from strong ones and they are also subject to a madhhab imam. They are considered as fiqh scholars because they understand what they read very well and they explain it to other muqallids who cannot understand them. That is, the reason why they are called fiqh scholars is that they can understand the works of the mujtahids very well. They cannot make ijtihad.

After explaining these seven levels of the mujtahids in his work entitled “Hukuk-u İslamiye ve Istılahat-ı Fıkhiye Kamusu”, Ömer Nasuhi mentions Ibn Abidin as a scholar in the seventh layer. Ibn Abidin is one of the greatest Hanafi fiqh scholars of the ninth century; he wrote a book of six volumes called “Raddul-Muhtar”; each volume consists of more than nine hundred pages.

In other words, Ibn Abidin, who is one of the great fiqh scholars of the ninth century and who is the writer of the book called “Raddul-Muhtar”, which all of the fiqh scholars of today use as  resource book, is only a muqallid and cannot make ijtihad; he imitates Abu Hanifa and is subject to him about fiqh issues.

In that case, how can you make ijtihad, which Ibn Abidin cannot make, though you cannot read and understand the book he wrote?

You can understand how difficult to make ijtihad is through the following examples:

Sheikh al-Islam Abus-Suud Efendi, who is well-known with his nickname "the mufti of people and jinn", states the following about Imam al-Ghazali, who is famous for his nickname “Hujjatul-Islam”, that is, “Islam’s Evidence: “It is not permissible to rely on the statements of Imam Ghazali and similar scholars, who are not mujtahid, related to the issues of ijtihad."

Just think about it: a scholar like Imam Ghazali, who is called “Hujjatul-Islam cannot make ijtihad but becomes subject to Imam Shafi and accepts his madhhab related to fiqh issue. And Abus-Suud said says, "If Imam Ghazali utters a statement that is contrary to his own madhhab, it is not permissible to rely on it."

Now I ask you: even a great scholar like Imam Ghazali, who is regarded as the sun of the century he lived in, cannot make ijtihad and becomes subject to Imam Shafi; how can you and people like you want to make ijtihad and regard yourselves competent to make ijtihad? Are you a better scholar than Imam Ghazali since you try to do something that Imam Ghazali could not do?

Jalaluddin Suyuti memorized 200,000 hadiths. He met the Prophet (pbuh) 70 times in the realm of yaqaza (wakefulness). In other words, the Prophet (pbuh) became a guest of Jalaluddin Suyuti for 70 times after his death and became visible to him. What kind of a rank does Jalaluddin Suyuti have since he attained the honor of talking to the Prophet 70 times?  In addition, he wrote four hundred works in various branches of ilm (science). When such a person wanted to make ijtihad, the scholars of that century prevented him from making ijtihad by saying, "The era of ijtihad passed; you are not able capable of making ijtihad."

Now I am asking you again: how dare you try to make ijtihad though Jalaluddin Suyuti, who memorized 200,000 hadiths with their chains of narrators, who is a writer of 400 different works, and who talked to the Prophet while he was awake 70 times could not make ijtihad? Do you think you are a better scholar than Suyuti? There were 200,000 hadiths in his memory. Do you have 200 hadiths in your memory? You and people like you cannot even understand the works of Suyuti. How can you catch up with him and be superior to him? A person who thinks he is superior to him decrees with his own view and becomes superior to him in his imagination. In fact, in a place where you are drowned, Jalaluddin Suyuti’s heels do not even get wet.

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi describes the difficulty of ijtihad as follows: "It is a rule of methodology that if a person who is not a fiqh scholar is a mujtahid in fiqh methodology (usul al-fiqh), he is not regarded as reliable in consensus of fiqh because he is regarded as ordinary compared to them."

Let me explain this statement a bit. In fact, you are a great scholar; you have probably understood it but I will simplify and explain it. Fiqh methodology is a deep science that teaches the methods and rules of fiqh. It takes a lifetime to learn this science, let alone being a mujtahid in it. However, even if a person attains the rank of ijtihad in this science with a special talent bestowed on him, he cannot issue fatwas, cannot deduce decrees from four evidences and his statements are not regarded as reliable.  Nursi’s following statement is also significant: "He is regarded as ordinary compared to them." The original word he uses lexically means illiterate person. So, even if he is a mujtahid in fiqh methodology, he is considered as an illiterate child compared to madhhab imams.

If mujtahids of fiqh methodology are like illiterate children compared to madhhab imams, what will the rank of you and people like you who are unaware of fiqh methodology be? How can you fulfill the task of deducing decrees from four evidences, which cannot be done even by a mujtahid of fiqh methodology?

Once, somebody said, "They say there cannot be a prayer without wudu, but I did it (I performed a prayer without wudu)." In fact, only you think you did it but it is not accepted. You think you make ijtihad just like this man. You say, "I made ijtihad." However, it is impossible. What you say has no value. You think you are making ijtihad but what you are actually doing is throwing yourself into fire.

A- Who identified these seven levels? I do not accept them. I do not have to accept them.

B- Then I will ask you a question: Who identified the titles like assistant, doctor, associate professor and professor?

A- The academicians dealing with educational affairs must have determined them.  

B- Do you mean the relevant experts and specialists determined them?

A- Yes, probably.

B- Have you objected to these titles so far? Or have you ever seen anyone objecting to them?

A- No, I have not objected and I have not seen anyone objecting to them.

B- Suppose that you saw something like this: An illiterate person said, "Who determined these titles? I do not recognize them. I am a professor too. I do not have to undergo the training they determined in order to obtain the title of professor. I regard myself as a professor. This acceptance is enough for me." What would you say to a person like that?

A- In fact, I would not even answer these ridiculous words; I would only laugh. It is nonsensical to say anything to a person who utters so much nonsense. He cannot even read and write but he declares himself a professor. I would not say anything to this man and leave him alone, saying he is mad.

B- Are you any different from this man? You are the same. He denies the accumulation of knowledge required for titles such as doctors, associate professors and professors, and declares himself a professor. You deny the levels of fiqh scholars and accept yourself as a mujtahid. In fact, you do not regard being a mujtahid enough; you even claim to be in one of the first three levels that can make ijtihad.

It is possible to understand the person who accepts himself as a professor in a way though he is not a professor. For, the title of professorship is not a title that is obtained with great difficult. However, it is very difficult to understand people like you. For, there is a distance as far as the distance between the earth and the sky between the level where you see yourself and the real position of your level. Your position looks like that of a cricket which thinks it is the sun!

A- Come off it and tell me about the Quran. Are madhhabs mentioned in the Quran?

The verses of the Quran that order to follow a madhhab – 1

A- Come off it and tell me about the Quran. Are madhhabs mentioned in the Quran?

B- You always act like that. When you are pushed in the corner, you start to say, “Does it exist in the Quran?” I will ask you something: Does everything have to be in the Quran? If something is not in the Quran, is it not accepted? If so, I want to ask you: Are the numbers of rak’ahs mentioned in the Quran? For instance, how many rak’ahs is the fard of the morning prayer and how should it be performed? Can you show it to me in the Quran?

The Quran says give zakah. Can you show me in the Quran from what goods and at what rate does zakah need to be given? For instance, what is the rate of zakah for honey? What is the rate of zakah for cereals? What is the rate of zakah for camels? Can you show me these and other issues about zakah in the Quran? No, because these things about zakah are not mentioned in the Quran. Should we determine a criterion about zakah since the Quran does not mention it or should we learn it from the Sunnah?

I can increase the examples and even give you more than one thousand examples. What I mean is that the Quran is not the only source of Islam. Along with the Quran, the Sunnah, consensus (ijma) and analogy (qiyas) are also evidences in Islam.

What do you want to find in the Quran when you say, "Are madhhabs mentioned in the Quran?" In other words, do you expect Allah Almighty to order one of the four madhhabs to His slaves? Or do you expect Him to give an order by mentioning Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi and others by saying, "O my slaves! Follow Abu Hanifa! Follow Imam Shafi!" Do you expect this?

You are so ignorant about the spirit of the Quran and its purpose of revelation! If you understood some of the wisdom of the purpose of revelation of the Quran, you would not ask a question like "Are madhhabs mentioned in the Quran?"

A- Do you speak so because you could not show madhhabs in the Qur'an? I repeat the same thing: Show me madhhabs in the Qur'an. Otherwise, I will not accept madhhabs.

B- My brother! The Quran does not mention madhhabs and imams of madhhabs clearly. However, the Qur'an teaches us the principles that we will act upon and that surround every moment of our lives. I understand that you are unaware of these principles. And you think that I do not know about the Quran, and that you will push me to the corner with the Quran. Then, I will speak to you with the language of the Quran and its principles. Let us see how much you know about these principles of the Quran!

The following is stated in verse 58 of the chapter of an-Nisa: “Allah doth command you to render back your Trusts to those to whom they are due.” We are ordered to give trusts to the people to whom they are due. This is a principle that applies to all of our affairs. Since Allah ordered us to give each trust to the people to whom they are due, the question to which we have to search for and find an answer is this: It is a trust to deduce decrees from the Book and Sunnah and to give a fatwa - that is, to make ijtihad - about an issue. Who is the person to whom this trust needs to be given? And to whom will this trust be given?

Now I ask you:

• A person who memorizes one hundred thousand hadiths with their chains of narrators is called a hafiz of hadith. Are imams of madhhabs whom hafizes of hadith follow related to fiqh issues qualified people of trust or ignorant people like you who have not memorized even one hundred hadiths let alone one hundred thousand?  
• Are the scholars who are in the first three layers of fiqh scholars, (mujtahid fi-shar, mujtahid fil-madhhab and mujtahid fil-masala) qualified people of trust in deducing decrees from evidences or brave ignorant people like you who are not even aware of the levels of fiqh scholars?
• Are the imams of four madhhab, whom the scholars like Imam Ghazali, Imam Rabbani, al-Jassas and Imam Suyuti, who came in each century and enlightened their centuries with their knowledge and taqwa followed, qualified people of trust or people like you who are deprived of taqwa and knowledge?
• Imam Malik was a person who was adherent to the Sunnah very much. He showed great respect to the Prophet (pbuh). Even when he was old, he did not mount any animal in Madinah and would say, "I cannot ride an animal in this city where the Prophet of Allah is buried. I would feel ashamed if I traveled riding an animal on the land where the body of the Messenger of Allah is buried." When he narrated a hadith, he would make wudu first, put on clean and new clothes, wear a nice perfume; then, he would narrate the hadith respectfully and solemnly. Is a person having such good manners qualified for fatwa or people like you who are deprived of good manners?
• Imam Malik acted very carefully so that the people from whom he narrated hadiths should be reliable, ascetic, pious and qualified people of hadith. He expressed his sensitivity in this regard as follows: "I have seen seventy people under these columns (he pointed to the columns of Masjid an-Nabawi) saying, 'The Prophet (pbuh) said this and that.' I have not received anything from any of them. They were probably reliable enough to entrust the Treasury but none of them were competent enough to report hadiths." Is Imam Malik, who was so meticulous in accepting and reporting hadiths, qualified for ijtihad or you and people like you who are unaware of the science of hadith?

Now tell me this: The Quran orders us to entrust things to qualified people. Who are the qualified people for ijtihad?

A- I want a clear Quranic verse from you. You show me the verse that mentions entrusting things to qualified people. Is that verse about madhhabs?

B- I told you at the beginning directly that it was not about madhhabs. However, it is a principle and it applies to all trusts. Even organs like the eye, tongue and mind are things entrusted to us. To give them to qualified people means to use them so that they will fulfill their original duty.

A- Show me another verse. I have not been satisfied with that. Do you have another verse to show me?

B- I will show you another one but before I show it, I will tell you the same thing. The verse does not have to mention directly to follow a madhhab. We may and we must apply the general principles of the verses in the issue of madhhab along with other issues in our lives. That is the purpose of the revelation of the Quran.

The following is stated in verse 110 of the chapter of Aal-i Imran: “Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah.”

In the verse above, this ummah and the scholars of this ummah are described by Allah as the people who enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong. In that case, what this ummah order unanimously must be good and what they forbid unanimously must be bad. It cannot be otherwise. In other words, they cannot forbid what is right and enjoin what is wrong. For, it is contrary to the statement of the Quranic verse, which is not possible.

Since whatever this ummah, and especially its scholars, orders is good and whatever they forbid is evil, having no madhhab must be haram and following a madhhab must be wajib. For, the scholars of this ummah have forbidden having no madhhab stating that it is a bad thing and ordered us to follow a madhhab for 14 centuries. Now let us quote some of those statements:

Imam Ghazali states the following: A person who is not a mujtahid must be subject to a madhhab imam. It is not permissible for muqallids, that is, those who cannot deduce decrees from the Quran and hadiths, to act contrarily to the decrees of the imam of the madhhab that they imitate and follow. There is no one stating that they can. Such a person has to follow the imam in all aspects. If he opposes the imam of his madhhab, it is a bad deed and he becomes a sinner because of this opposition. There are no mujtahids among the people who live in this century. Those who are not mujtahids respond to the questions they are asked only by transferring the answers from the imam of the madhhab. It is not permissible for a person to act contrarily to the ijtihad of his madhhab imam.  

Ahmad bin Muhammad Tahtawi states the following: A person who moves away from what fiqh scholars say for a hand span goes astray. The way of salvation is in four madhhabs called Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. These four madhhabs are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi and Hanbali. A person who does not follow one of these four true madhhabs becomes a person of bid'ah and goes to Hell.

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi states the following: Let your qiblah be the four madhhabs in your prayer of truth.

Abdulghani Nablusi states the following: It is not permissible today to follow any madhabs other than the four madhhabs. For, to follow any madhabs other than the four madhhabs means to abandon consensus, which is not permissible.

Imam Rabbani states the following: To abandon madhhabs and to be without a madhab is unbelief. A person who abandons one of the four madhhabs removes the rope of Islam from his neck.

Ibn Malak says: All of the Muslims living today are muqallids. In other words, they are people of taqlid and have follow a madhhab. No matter how knowledgeable a muqallid is, he cannot make ijtihad. However, they can only report the decrees of mujtahids.

Ibn Abidin and Shawahidul-Haqq state the following: Islamic scholars unanimously state that a scholar who could make ijtihad alone was not born after the fourth century. Now all Muslims have to follow one of the four madhhabs. For, there is no scholar who can understand the Quran and all of the hadiths and who can deduce decrees from them today. If a person follows a madhhab, it means he follows the Quran and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah.

When the great scholar Jalaluddin Suyuti said he was a mujtahid, his contemporary scholars asked Suyuti a question: "The previous scholars gave two different answers about this issue. A person who is in the lowest level of ijtihad can choose one of them. If you are a mujtahid, choose one of them and inform us about it.” Suyuti feared Allah and felt worried that he could not choose the right one; he could not dare to choose one.

Thereupon, Ibn Hajar said: Since it is so difficult to prefer between two hadiths, which is the lowest level of ijtihad, it should be understood that it is impossible to become an absolute mujtahid. 

Sheikh al-Islam Zakariyya says: If the imams of madhhabs had not explained the ambiguous hadiths and verses, we could not have understood any of them or we would have misunderstood them.

In his book called Bariqa, the great scholar Muhammad Hadimi, says: "There are four religious evidences as the Book, Sunnah, consensus and analogy only for the mujtahid scholars at the level of ijtihad. The evidence for muqallids, that is, those who are not mujtahids, is the decree of the madhhab they follow and the view of the imam of the madhhab. For, muqallids cannot deduce decrees from verses and hadiths.

Imam Shafi states the following: May Allah damn those who do not like Abu Hanifa’s views and ijtihads! For, all mujtahids are like the children of Abu Hanifa.

Tajuddin Subki says: It is necessary to show respect to the imams of madhhab, who are the inheritors of the Prophets. A person who talks against the imams of the religion moves toward destruction. All of their statements are based on evidence.

Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari says: Having no madhhab is a bridge to having no religion.

Tahtawi states the following: Only four of the tens of Ahl as-Sunnah madhhabs were recorded; the others were partly forgotten. Those who are not mujtahids have to follow one of these four madhhabs in all of their deeds and worshipping.

Abdurrahman Silhati and Imam Nablusi state the following: To imitate a madhhab does not mean to deviate from the Book and the Sunnah. On the contrary, to follow what the madhhab imam knows from the Book and the Sunnah means to follow the Book and the Sunnah.

It would be a separate book if we were to quote all of the statements regarding the issue. For, all scholars stated over 14 centuries that it was necessary to be subject to a madhhab and that it was not permissible to have no madhhab. I find these quotations enough so as not to lengthen the issue any longer and now I say to you:

It is stated in verse 110 of the chapter of Aal-i Imran that this ummah was evolved as the best of peoples for mankind and that the main reason for being the best ummah is enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong. That is, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong is a characteristic of this ummah. And this ummah will never agree unanimously on something wrong as the Prophet puts it: "My ummah will never agree unanimously on wrong things." In that case, We can reason as follows:  

• As the Quran puts it, the characteristic of this ummah is enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong.
• As the Prophet (pbuh) puts it, this ummah will never agree unanimously on wrong things.
• Therefore, an issue that is agreed on unanimously will be right, not wrong.

And since the issue that is agreed on unanimously will be right, being subject to a madhhab must also be right. For, all of the Islamic scholars agreed on this issue and they all said that it was necessary to be subject to a madhhab. In addition, even those great scholars who knew a hundred thousand hadiths with their chains of narrators themselves imitated those great imams of madhhabs by being subject to a madhhab.

A- Your explanations are reasonable; I accept them. However, the relationship you established with the verse is distant in my opinion. It cannot be proved that it is necessary to be subject to a madhhab only by the characteristic of this ummah enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong.

B- I do not say, "This verse is only about madhhabs." I say this: This verse states that what this ummah, and especially the scholars of this ummah, orders unanimously is good and what they forbid unanimously is evil. Now you can use it related to any issue you wish. A short way to find out what is good and what is bad is to look at the alliance of the ummah. That is, if the whole ummah says something is bad, that thing cannot be good. If they say it is good, it cannot be bad. The scholars of this ummah say having no madhhab is bad. Something that they unanimously agree to be bad cannot be good. That is what I say.

A- I think the relationship you established is still distant. What you say is reasonable but indirect. You should show me a stronger verse.

B- I can show you more verses. However, I warn you again: I do not say that this verse was sent down about madhhabs. I say when we look at the issue in the light of the principle declared by this verse, it becomes clear that it is necessary to be subject to a madhhab. Do not accuse me of misinterpreting the verses.

The verses of the Quran that order to follow a madhhab – 2

The following is stated in verse 7 of the chapter of Aal-i Imran: “…but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge...”

The word mutashabih mentioned in the verse means verses whose meanings are hidden and that have a meaning different from its apparent meaning.

The word rasikh lexically means deep knowledge in science, soundness, being fully constant and settling.

It is stated in the verse that the meaning of the mutashabih part of the Quran can only be known by Allah and rasikhun (those who are firmly grounded in knowledge) and that the others will not be able to understand the mutashabih part of the Quran. In that case, we can say that the only way to understand the mutashabih part of the Quran is to be firmly grounded in knowledge or to apply to those who are firmly grounded in knowledge.

Imam Rabbani explains being rasikh in knowledge as follows: “Rasikh scholars have satisfied their souls fully and hence attained the truth of shari’ah, which consists of following and being subject to the Prophet (pbuh). This perfection does not exist in others. We will explain one sign of being rasikh here so that those who know apparent meanings will not claim to be rasikh and will not think that their evil-commanding soul is satisfied soul. A rasikh scholar has a great share in the interpretation and explanation of the mutashabih part of the Book and the Sunnah. Besides, they have a great share in the secrets of the muqatta’a letters at the beginning of some chapters of the Quran.

It means those who are rasikh are the people who reach the cores of sciences with their knowledge and deeds, and who combine the knowledge they obtain by studying with the secret knowledge given by Allah.

Many statements and explanations were made about being rasikh in ilm (knowledge). I find the explanation above enough so as not to lengthen the issue and want to deal with the part of the verse that indicates following and being subject to madhhab imams. 

Attention is attracted to two issues in the verse above:

1- The existence of the mutashabih part in the Quran,

2- The meaning of this mutashabih part being known only by Allah and those who are firmly grounded (rasikh) in knowledge.

Now I ask you this question: Since the Quran has a mutashabih part and since only Allah knows and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge can understand it, are you one of those who are firmly grounded in knowledge? If you are not – it is clear that you are not – what will you do in order to understand this mutashabih part?

The only thing you can do is to apply to those who are firmly grounded in knowledge. If you do not apply to rasikh people and if you try to understand the meaning of the mutashabih part of the Quran yourself, you will not understand it or you will misunderstand it, ruining yourself. For, Allah states that only those who are rasikh in knowledge can understand it. We explained the meaning of being rasikh in knowledge above; you are definitely not one of them.  

In addition to the mutashabih part of the Quran, there are also mutashabih hadiths. They are more than the mutashabih verses in the Quran. In that case, it is necessary to do the same thing as we do about the verses, that is, to apply to rasikh scholars to understand the mutashabih hadiths and learn the real meaning of them from those scholars.

Since it has become clear that we, who are not rasikh in knowledge, have to apply to those who are rasikh in knowledge in order to understand the mutashabih parts of the Quran and hadiths, I want to ask you the following questions:

• Is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, who memorized one million hadiths with their chains of narrators rasikh in knowledge, or you and people like you, who have not memorized even a hundred hadiths?
• Are madhhab imams who know the terminological and lexical meanings of the Quran and their parts like khass, amm, mushtarak, sarikh, kinaya, zahir, nass, khafiyy, mushkil, mutashabih, dall bil-ibare, dall bil-iqtida, dall bil-ishara, nasikh and Mansukh are rasikh scholars or you, who can only read the Quran?
• Is Imam Muhammad, who is intelligent enough to memorize the whole Quran in a week, rasikh in knowledge, or you who have not memorized even ten pages of the Quran?
• Is Imam Shafi, who is a genius that covers the page next to the page that he reads and when they ask him why he does so says he memorizes the whole page when his eye catches the sight of it, is rasikh or you who forget things easily and who forget the food you eat one day before let alone memorizing what you read and not forgetting what you memorize?
• Is Badiuzzaman Said Nursi, who learned the knowledge that could be learned in forty years only in three months when he was ten years old and who memorized 90 books word by word, rasikh in knowledge or you ignorant people, who have difficulty in understanding a book you read?
• Is Abu Hanifa, who is like the father of all fiqh scholars as Imam Shafi puts it, rasikh in knowledge or you poor people, who regard insulting great scholars as a sign of perfection?

It is possible to increase the questions. The only answer we give to those questions is this: The four madhhab imams and the scholars that follow their path are rasikh in knowledge. And we learn the mutashabih parts of both the Quran and hadiths from them.

A- Your questions brought me to my senses but there is a lot more for me to surrender. What you say is logical but I want to see a verse that orders to follow a madhhab more clearly. I think you do not know such a verse. Therefore, you beat about the bush.

B- There are several verses but I see that you want to see the name of Abu Hanifa and the other imams in the Quran. You say you will not accept if you do not see them. I have already told you that it is impossible. Your purpose is not to learn but to deny by obstinacy. There was a golden rule between us. We were not supposed to oppose by obstinacy related to the things that the mind and conscience accept. Do your mind and logic not accept what I tell you?  

A- They do… If they were clearer, they would accept more easily.

B- Then, I will show you a clearer verse:

The verses of the Quran that order to follow a madhhab – 3

The following is stated in verse 115 of the chapter of an-Nisa: “If anyone contends with the Messenger even after guidance has been plainly conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that of believers, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen, and land him in Hell,- what an evil refuge!”

Imam Shafi showed this verse as an evidence that ijma (the unanimous agreement of Islamic scholars on an issue: consensus) is an evidence in shari’ah  and that it is haram to oppose a decree about which there is ijma. Imam Shafi explains how this verse is an evidence for ijma as follows:  

As this verse states, it is forbidden and haram “to follow a path other than that of believers”. In that case, it must be wajib to follow the way of believers. Besides, Allah Almighty threatens believers against two things by this verse:

1- To oppose the Messenger of Allah,

2- to follow a path other than that of believers.

In that case, it is understood that to oppose the Prophet and “to follow a path other than that of believers” is a reason for threat alone. Thus, it becomes definite that it is haram to oppose a decree on which there is unanimous disagreement, that is, ijma, and that it is wajib to follow ijma. For, the expression “not to follow the path of believers” means “to follow a path other than that of believers”; since it is haram to follow a path other than that of believers, it becomes wajib to follow the way of believers, that is, ijma. For, it is impossible to go beyond these two opposites.

Since this verse is a clear evidence that ijma is an evidence of shari’ah and that it is not possible to oppose Islamic scholars regarding an issue on which Islamic scholars unanimously agree, having no madhhab must be haram. For, Islamic scholars unanimously agree that the Muslims who are not mujtahids have to follow a madhhab. I quoted some of their statements before. There is no disagreement among the scholars regarding the issue. No Islamic scholar advised having no madhhab; the scholars that enlightened the centuries in which they lived like the sun like Imam Ghazali, Imam Rabbani, Imam Sarakhsi, who is well-known with the nickname the Sun of Imams, and Imam Qurtubi followed a madhhab imam related to fiqh issues and became subject to that imam.

You have to do one of the two things to be able to deny the obligation of following a madhhab:

Firstly, you have to prove that ijma is not an evidence. For, if you cannot prove it, you will have to accept that ijma is an evidence of shari’ah. Since there is an ijma of Islamic scholars on following a madhhab, to accept ijma means to accept to follow a madhhab. This shows that having no madhhab is opposition to ijma and hence it is not permissible.

It is not possible for you to do it, that is, to deny that ijma is an evidence of shari’ah. For, it is wajib to act in accordance with ijma as the verse we have interpreted and the other verses and hadiths indicate. Nobody can refute the statement of those verses and hadiths. 

Since you cannot apply the first alternative, you have to follow the second way in order to be able to deny madhhabs. The second way is as follows:

You have to show an ijma on having no madhhabs. If you can do it, you can advocate having no madhhabs claiming that you follow ijma. Otherwise, you will have to accept that you oppose ijma. 

It is not possible for you to do it. For, Islamic scholars and Ahl as-Sunnah scholars have formed a great ijma agreeing unanimously regarding the issue that having no madhhab is haram for 14 centuries. Only very few ignorant people like you advocate having no madhhab.

A- I confess that the explanation you made with this verse shook me a bit. I found some ways of objecting to the explanations of the previous verses but I have nothing to say against this verse. I have been persuaded a bit but I am at the beginning of the road. You need to cope with me some more. Do you have any other verses to show?

B- Do not worry. Evidences and verses will not run out if you listen conscientiously. I hope your conscience will lead you to guidance.

The verses of the Quran that order to follow a madhhab – 4

Let me show you another verse. The following is stated in verse 59 of the chapter of an-Nisa: “O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you.”

Allah Almighty asks three kinds of obedience from us in that verse:

1. Obedience is obedience to Him.

2. Obedience is obedience to His Messenger.

3. Obedience is obedience to ulul-amr (those charged with authority).

What is meant by ulul-amr here? According to Ibn Abbas, who understands the Quran in the best way, Jabir Ibn Abdullah, Imam Mujahid, Imam Hasan, Imam Ata and many other scholars, what is meant by the phrase “ulul-amr” is scholars. Imam Qurtubi writes in his tafsir that Imam Malik holds the same view. According to Imam Dahhak, ulul-amr is the fiqh scholars who know the religion the best. Jalaluddin Suyuti, who is a great scholar that memorized 200.000 hadiths, states in his work called “Itqan” that ulul-amr is the scholars of the religion and fiqh.

A- However, there is no clear statement about who “ulul-amr” is in the verse.

B- Let me tell you about a general rule: “Regarding a controversial issue in a branch of science or art, the words of the geniuses of that science and art are valid. No matter how intelligent a person is, his view is not valid and is not taken into consideration if he is not an expert in that science or art.”

For instance, the view of a great engineer is not taken into consideration regarding a minor disease. The view of doctors is valid regarding the science of medicine and the view of an ordinary doctor is preferred to the word of a genius in another branch of science.

The scholars who understand the Quran in the best way and whose names we have mentioned and not mentioned agree unanimously that ulul-amr, whom we are ordered to obey, is religious scholars. Their view is valid regarding the issue. For, they are the geniuses of this science. The views of others against their unanimous agreement is like the buzzing of a mosquito against thunder.

Another evidence showing that ulul-amr mentioned in the verse is scholars is this: In that verse, Allah definitely orders us to obey ulul-amr. The people whom Allah definitely orders us to obey must definitely be infallible. For, if they are not infallible, it means Allah orders us to obey them even when they are wrong, which is impossible, since the order is definite. That is, the people whom Allah orders us to obey must definitely be infallible. These infallible people are either the individuals of the ummah or a group of ummah. They cannot be the individuals of the ummah because individuals cannot be infallible; besides, it is not possible for the ummah to find such rare people and to learn the religion from them; and the weakness of the ummah regarding the issue is obvious.

Therefore, the phrase ulul-amr mentioned in the verse must be a group; and this group is the group of mujtahid scholars who have the authority to issue fatwas in the ummah. Individuals might make mistakes but Islamic scholars do not agree on something wrong. Thus, it is concluded that the phrase ulul-amr mentioned in the verse is the group of scholars. In addition, the following verse also proves that scholars are called ulul-amr:

“Nor should the Believers all go forth together: if a contingent from every expedition remained behind, they could devote themselves to studies in religion, and admonish the people when they return to them,- that thus they (may learn) to guard themselves (against evil).” (at-Tawba: 122)

It is stated in this verse that scholars should admonish people and that people should guard themselves; accepting the words of scholars are rendered wajib for the people who are admonished. From this point of view, it is appropriate for scholars to be given the name ulul-amr. In conclusion, we can say that we are ordered to obey ulul-amr along with Allah and His Messenger. What is meant by ulul-amr here is the mujtahid scholars of this ummah. For,

1- A scholar like Ibn Abbas who says, “If I lose the halter of my camel, I will find it in the Quran”, a researcher like Jalaluddin Suyuti, who memorized 200.000 hadiths and hundreds and thousands of scholars like them agree unanimously that what is meant by ulul-amr is scholars; the words of others are of no value in the presence of their words. 

2- The ulul-amr to be obeyed must be infallible so that they will be obeyed. If they are not infallible, obedience in case of sins is also necessary, which is not permissible. In fact, no individual except prophets is infallible. In that case, the ulul-amr to be obeyed must be a group, not an individual. Such a group can consist of scholars only. In conclusion, obedience to scholars regarding an issue on which scholars agree is the order of the verse; and scholars agreed on the necessity of following a madhhab. 

In addition, we want to attract attention to the remaining part of the verse: The verse continues as follows: “If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger.” This divine statement proves that along with ijma (consensus), qiyas (analogy) is also right and a religious evidence:

We are ordered by the verse to refer an issue about which we differ to Allah and His Messenger. An issue about which people differ cannot have been mentioned clearly in the Quran and hadiths. For, if an issue about which people differ had been stated clearly in the Quran and hadiths, there would have been no need to disagree about it.   

The method to use in order to settle such a question is to take it to Allah and His Messenger as the verse orders it, that is, to deduce a decree by comparing it to the issues whose decrees are clearly stated in the Quran and hadiths. It means this verse orders qiyas, which means looking for an issue similar to the one whose decree is not stated among the issues whose decrees are stated and deducing a decree by comparing them.

Now, my question to you is this: Since qiyas is an evidence in shari’ah and there are many issues to be settled by qiyas, who will make qiyas? 

● Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, who memorized one million hadiths or you who have not memorized even 100 or 200 hadiths?  

● Imam Muhammad, who memorized the whole Quran in a week, Said Ibn Uyayna, who memorized the whole Quran when he was only four years old, or you who read the translation of the Quran and regard yourselves as scholars?

● Abu Hanifa, who is the father of all fiqh scholars according to the statement of Imam Shafi, or ignorant and brave people who make decrees based on their own thought without being aware of fiqh methodology and rules? Who will make qiyas? We say, “Madhab imams who are experts in this field make qiyas.” You, who are people without madhhab, say, “We can also make qiyas.” However, it is necessary to know the Quran and hadiths very well in order to make qiyas. All of the madhhab imams were geniuses who knew more than five hundred thousand hadiths with their chains of narrators. 

● How many hadiths do people who compare themselves with those imams have in their memory?

● How many hadith narrators do they know?

● Do they know about jarh and ta’dil, nasikh and mansukh, and tariq al-wurud of hadiths?

● Do they know very well about the issues that madhhab imams know very well like terminological and lexical meanings, khass, amm, mushtarak, sarikh, kinaya, zahir, nass, khafiyy, mushkil, mutashabih, dall bil-ibare, dall bil-iqtida, dall bil-ishara, nasikh and mansukh?

● Let alone knowing them very well, do you know their meaning?

How do you dare to make ijtihad though you do not know them? Are you not afraid of making a decree that Allah will not be pleased with? Are you not worried that the decree you will deduce will be contrary to hadiths and that you will oppose the Prophet? You probably get your courage from your ignorance. May Allah protect us from being ignorant like that and from following such ignorant people!

A- By Allah, I do not know what to say and how to oppose. When I started to debate with you, I thought I would easily defeat you. However, you stood against me with virtually tanks and planes, not with cannons and rifles. I have never heard about what you have mentioned. My obstinacy has ended. I want to learn more. Can you show me some other verses?

B- I definitely will.

The verses of the Quran that order to follow a madhhab – 5

The following is stated in verse 83 of the chapter of an-Nisa: “When there comes to them some matter touching (Public) safety or fear, they divulge it. If they had only referred it to the Messenger, or to those charged with authority among them, the proper investigators would have tested it from them (direct)…”

The root of the word “istinbat” translated as “the proper investigators” is “nabt”, which means the first water drawn from a well. A fiqh scholar’s making decrees from hadiths and verses by making ijtihad is likened to drawing water from a well due to its difficulty and hardship, and it is called “istinbat”.

The suffix “s” in the phrase “the proper investigators would have tested it from them” refers to ulul-amr (those charged with authority) and is an evidence for ijtihad. It means istinbat is an attribute of ulul-amr as the verse puts it, and Allah orders us to refer to ulul-amr who can make istinbat.

Those to whom issues need to be referred to, that is, ulul-amr, mentioned in the verse are scholars who own knowledge and ijtihad according to Fakhruddin ar-Razi. Ibn Abidin reported the same meaning and showed Ayni as evidence for his view.  

Fakhruddin ar-Razi says, “That verse indicates four things.” He lists them as follows:

1- It is necessary to make istinbat and ijtihad related to the issues whose decrees are not stated clearly.

2- Istinbat, that is, ijtihad, is a religious evidence.

3- The Messenger of Allah is in charge of istinbat.

4- It is wajib for ordinary people who are not mujtahids to imitate mujtahids related to fiqh decrees. For, it is clearly stated in the verse that those who are not well aware of decrees related to issues need to refer to people of istinbat, that is, mujtahid scholars.   

If you still prefer having no madhhab after these explanations and say, “I am a person of istinbat”, I will ask you the following questions:  

• How many hadiths are there in your memory?
• From whom did you learn these hadiths?
• How many of the narrators in their chains do you know?
• Do you know about jarh and ta’dil, nasikh and mansukh, and tariq al-wurud of hadiths?    

How do you dare to make istinbat and ijtihad, which scholars known as hadith hafizes who knew 100,000 hadiths with their chains of narrators, and scholars like Imam Ghazali, Imam Rabbani, Imam Sarakhsi and Jalaluddin Suyuti could not dare?

There are more verses that I can show you. However, I will not quote them so as not to bore the people who are listening to our conversation. If you want to see them too, you can enter the website seyrangah.com and examine the other verses by downloading the e-book of this work from the link below this video. 

A- I will visit that page and see the verses not because there is a doubt in my mind but because I want to strengthen my belief regarding the issue. For, I now believe that it is necessary to follow a madhhab. In fact, you persuaded me at the beginning but my obstinacy led me here. I could not accept it for a while due to my conceit. However, I surrender now and thank you for saving me from having no madhhab. However, there are many questions related to madhhabs in my mind. If you answer those questions, you will save me from this disease. 

B- Before hearing your questions, I want to quote some of the hadiths of the Prophet (pbuh). These hadiths will guide you. The Prophet insistently advised us to follow a scholar and warned us against the evils of bad scholars. Some of the hadiths regarding the issue are as follows:

• Follow scholars! For, they are the lights of the world and the hereafter. (Daylami)
• Scholars are guides that show the way to salvation. (I. Najjar)
• If it were not for scholars, people would be destroyed. (Imam Mawardi)
• Ask righteous people about what you do not know and learn from them. (Tabarani)
• The best people are the Muslims living in my age. The best ones after them are the ones that will come after them. After that, lies will prevail; do not believe in their words and deeds. (Bukhari, Muslim)
• A person who has the following two characteristics will be recorded among the slaves who show patience and who thanks: If a person looks at somebody who is superior to him in terms of religion and follows him and if he looks at somebody who is inferior to him in terms of the world and thanks Allah, Allah will record this person as a person who shows patience and who thanks. (Ibnul As)

The Prophet warned us against the evil of bad scholars in many hadiths. We will mention some of them:

• Allah will remove the scholars who act in accordance with their knowledge in order to remove knowledge from you. Ignorant people will remain. They will answer the questions of those who ask about religion based on their own minds and cause people to deviate from the right path. (Bukhari)
• At the end of time, scholars will die and ignorant people will replace them. They will issue wrong fatwas without knowing; they will go astray and cause others to go astray too. (Bukhari)
• My ummah will be destroyed because of bad scholars and ignorant worshippers. The worst of the worst are bad scholars. The best of the best are good scholars.  (Darimi)
• I fear from deviant imams rather than Dajjal (Anti-Christ) about you. (Imam Ahmad)
• At the end of time, scholars and knowledge will decrease; ignorance will increase. Ignorant and heretic clerics will issue wrong fatwas, cause mischief and deviate people from the right path. (Bukhari)
• “There will come such a time that Islam will be dominant; merchants will do business traveling overseas without fearing and cavalrymen will fight in the way of Allah. Then, a nation will emerge; they will read the Quran and say:  ‘Who can read better than us? Who are better scholars than us? Who has more fiqh knowledge than us?’ Then, the Prophet (pbuh) said, ‘They are from you, from this ummah; and they are fuel for Hell.” (Tabarani and Bazzar)

Learn these hadiths very well. Now it is time for the answers to your questions. Ask them. I hope I will give you convincing answers and save you from this disease fully.

The Reason for the Emergence of Madhhabs

A- My first question: Where did madhhabs emerge from? I wonder about it.

B – The question “Where did madhhabs emerge from?” is a question like the following questions: Where did the profession of a doctor emerge from? Where did engineering emerge from? Where did tailoring emerge from? For, being a madhhab imam is a profession like the other ones. Madhhabs and madhhab imams emerged due to the same reasons as the other profession.

Doctors emerged because not everybody can know the causes of diseases and how to treat them. Therefore, a person who has no knowledge in medicine has to consult somebody who is very good at medicine for the treatment of his illness. That person is a doctor. That is, the reason for the emergence of doctors is people’s being unable to discover the causes for diseases and methods of treatment. 

The profession of engineering occurred because not everybody can make the calculations about constructing a building and draw projects. Therefore, a person has to consult somebody who knows the issue. That person is an engineer. That is, the reason for the emergence of engineering is people’s lack of knowledge in engineering and the impossibility of everybody’s being an engineer.   

The reason for the emergence of tailoring and other professions is the same: People cannot know the subtleties of those professions and they need help about them. 

Being a madhab imam is a profession like that. The reason for the emergence of this profession is people’s inability to deduce decrees from the Quran and the Sunnah and their inability to make qiyas by comparing the issues about which there are no decrees by comparing them to those about which there are decrees.

We ask scholars about the issues that we do not know. Scholars report us the fatwas they learn from the books by reading them. Similarly, after the death of the Prophet, the great majority of Muslims were unable to deduce decrees from the Quran and the Sunnah; therefore, they asked the scholars who could make ijtihad and learn the answers from them. Those scholars virtually carried out the duty of prophethood and taught the decrees of the Quran and the Sunnah to those who did not know. The hadith “scholars are inheritors of prophets” probably points out this duty.

There were many mujtahid imams in the Era of Bliss. However, the fatwas of those mujtahids were not conveyed to the following generation. With the effect of divine wisdom, the imams of only 4 madhhabs and their students were accepted by the ummah; the fatwas issued by them, the decrees they deduced and the qiyases they made were recorded in a secure way; they reached us by tawatur.

It means the reason for the emergence of madhhabs is people’s inability to deduce decrees from the Quran and the Sunnah, hence asking mujtahid imams about the issues they did not know. 

A- Yes, your answer is reasonable. Now, I am asking my second question: Did madhhabs exist during the time of the Prophet (pbuh)?

Did madhhabs exist during the time of the Prophet (pbuh)?

Now, I am asking my second question: Did madhhabs exist during the time of the Prophet (pbuh)?

B- There were no madhhabs during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) because there was no needs for madhhabs. The Companions asked the Prophet himself about the issues they did not know and acted in accordance what they learned from the Prophet. That is, in that age, the Prophet himself carried out the duty of the madhhab imams who would be born one century later. 

Madhhabs emerged after the death of the Prophet. The Muslims who could not find the Prophet to ask questions asked mujtahid imams who knew the Sunnah of the Prophet and the Quran very well. Those scholars gave the answers they found in the Quran and the Sunnah to the ummah. The fatwas issued by those scholars were accepted by the people and consequently, the ummah of Muhammad, except some unfortunate people, accepted them as their guides to understand the fiqh aspect of the Quran and the Sunnah.

That is, there were no madhhabs during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) because there was no needs for madhhabs. Everybody saw the practice of the Prophet himself and imitated him; they learned things by asking the Prophet himself. Madhhabs emerged after the death of the Prophet and they taught the practices of the Prophet to the ummah. 

A- I liked this answer. My third question is as follows: What madhhab did the Prophet follow?

What madhhab did the Prophet follow?

A- This is my third question: What madhhab did the Prophet follow?

B- This question is a question that people with no madhhabs and irreligious people ask in order to drive Muslims into a corner. For, if the person who is asked this question says, “The Prophet had no madhhab”, the one who asks the question will say, “How did these madhhabs emerge then?” If he says, “The Prophet followed Hanafi or Shafi madhhab”, he will make a mistake by attributing a madhhab to the Prophet. If he keeps silent without answering, he will be defeated and approve that the person who asks the question is right. That is, he will lose in any case.

It is good that you have asked this question. We will give the answer to it here so that those who follow a madhhab will be saved from being overwhelmed by this nonsensical question asked by people with no madhhab. We will use some examples in the answer to this question. I will give you three examples now. Listen carefully!

1^st Example: Imagine a source of water and a pool formed by this source. There are four colors in the water flowing from the source. The water of the pool pours into four different channels. Blue, red, yellow and green.  These four colors exist in the pool in a mixed way; when the water moves toward the channels, a different color enters each channel. The blue color of the water enters a channel, red color enters another channel, yellow channel into a different channel and the green color into a different channel.

Now, the person standing next to the pool and seeing four different colors in these four channels asks: "What is the color of this pool?"

Now if we say "yellow", the pool is not yellow; if we say "red", the pool is not red either; And if we say "green", it is not green. If we say, "These waters do not come from this pool", it is not true ... If we do not answer, this will please the person who asks the question.

Then, it is necessary to give him the following answer, which is true and shows the truth: The water source and the pool are none of these colors; the source and the pool have such a color that they contain all these colors and all these colors belong to them. Each channel shows a color of the pool based on its own ability.

Similarly, the Prophet (pbuh) is a divine source and a pool of divine revelation. The religious decrees, which are like the life water of this pool, reach us through madhhabs, which are like channels. So to speak, each madhhab conveys a color of this pool to us and enables us to drink that life water. So, the Prophet (pbuh) is neither Hanafi, nor Shafi; he is neither Maliki nor Hanbali. The Prophet (pbuh) is a divine pool that has gathered the decrees of all these madhhabs in his shari’ah and the source of the truth. 

2^nd Example: Imagine a tree with four branches; each branch has a different fruit. There are apples on one branch, grapes on another branch, dates on a different branch and strawberries on the last branch.

An insane person looks at that magnificent tree and says, “What tree is this?”

If we say, “it is an apple tree”, he will deny the grapes on the branch; if we say, "it is a grape tree", he will deny the dates; if we say "it is a palm tree", he will deny the other fruits.

The answer to be given to him is as follows: This tree is such a tree that it cannot be named with the name of any fruit it produces. Perhaps this tree is a miracle of power that harbors all these fruits.

Similarly, the Prophet – so to speak – is such a tree. The four branches of this tree are the four madhhabs. On every branch, there are different fruits of prophethood. The Prophet (pbuh) is neither Shafi nor Maliki; he is neither Hanafi nor Hanbali. The Prophet is a luminous tree that contains all these madhhabs in his core and body.

3^rd Example: An insane person who sees the seven colors of the sun asks: "Is the sun blue? Is it red? Is it…..etc.?"

If we say "blue", the sun is not blue; if we say, "red", the sun is not red; if we say "orange", the sun is not orange; or, if we say another color, the sun is not that color.

Then, the truth is as follows: The sun is a divine object that contains all these colors;  and these seven colors emerge from its core.

Likewise, the Prophet (pbuh) is such a bright sun. The four madhhabs are colors of this sun. This divine sun cannot be named with any of these colors. However, it can be said that these four colors, that is, the four madhhabs are reflections filtered from the sun, showing one aspect of the sun. This sun has all these colors. His name is neither Shafi nor Maliki, neither Hanafi nor Hanbali. His name is Hz. Muhammad, the sun of the truth (peace be upon him).

A- You explained it in a really very nice way. Not a single word can be said against this explanation. Now I will ask another question whose answer I want to learn very much. What is the reason for the disagreement among sects? How can something be sunnah in a madhhab, wajib in another or halal in one and makruh in another? How is that possible? How can different decrees related to the same issue exist though the religion is the same?

Why are views different though the Quran and the Sunnah are the same?

A- Now, I will ask another question whose answer I want to learn very much. What is the reason for the disagreement among sects? How can something be sunnah in a madhhab, wajib in another or halal in one and makruh in another? How is that possible? How can different decrees exist related to the same issue though the religion is the same?

B- The disagreement among madhhabs misgives people who do not have enough fiqh knowledge and causes them to ask themselves the following two questions: 1- Why are views different though the Quran and the Sunnah are the same? 2- Which one of these views is true?

Satan and enemies of Islam attack them with these two questions by benefitting from their ignorance regarding the issue; they even deceive some of them, driving them away from the straight path. Let us answer these two questions, presenting water of life to the hearts that are hurt by those questions. Let us start with the second question.

The second question is as follows: How can all of the different decrees of four madhhabs be true and right? The truth is one and it does not change.

The answer to this question, whose answer seems to be very difficult and which misgive many Muslims about madhhabs because its answer is unknown, is very easy. Badiuzzaman Said Nursi gives a nice and convincing answer to this question. Thanks to this answer, it is clearly understood that all of the different decrees regarding the issue can be true and right. Let us quote the answer:

Badiuzzaman Said Nursi states the following:

If you say: The truth is one; how can the different ordinances of the four madhhabs be true?

The Answer: The same water governs in five different ways in five ill people of different disposition:

• For one, the water is a cure for his illness, and according to medicine, necessary (wajib).
• For another, it is like poison for his sickness and harmful, and medically prohibited (haram).
• For another, it causes a small amount of harm, and is reprehensible (makruh) medically.
• For another the water is beneficial and without harm; according to medicine that is sunnah for him.
• And for yet another it is neither harmful nor beneficial; he can drink it with good health, and for him it is medically permissible (mubah).

Thus, here the truth has become numerous; all five are true. It has become wajib for one, haram for another, makruh for another, and Sunnah and mubah for the other.

Can you say: “The water is only a cure, only wajib; there are no other decrees about it?” You cannot say so. For, the decree of the water changes according to ill people and characteristics.

Similarly, every decree of the religion and shari’ah is water of life for people. Divine decrees change based on those who follow madhhabs like the water in the example having five different decrees based on five characteristics. While one decree is wajib for a person, it can be haram for another and mubah for yet another. Denying this is nonsense like claiming that the water in the example has only one decree about all patients. Denying this is like denying the universality of Islam or accepting that all people have the same characteristics. 

Madhhab imams deduced decrees that were appropriate for the characteristics of the people living in their regions like a doctor. A decree that is like medicine – wajib – for a Muslim living in a certain region can be poison – haram – for a Muslim living in another region. 

For instance, those who follow Imam Shafi generally live in the countryside and desert compared to Hanafis; therefore, they are deprived of social life that regards congregation as one person. Thus, each of them reads al-Fatiha after the imam in order to express themselves in the presence of Allah and to request from Allah. Hanafis, who follow Abu Hanifa, generally live in cities, leading a civilized and social life; therefore, the congregation is regarded like one person and an individual speaks on behalf of the congregation; and the congregation approves him in the heart. The imam’s word is regarded as the word of the congregation. Acting upon this secret, Hanafis do not read al-Fatiha behind the imam. The imam reads on behalf of them and the others approve the imam through their hearts. Then, it is true and right to read al-Fatiha after the imam according to Shafis. It is a necessity and outcome of their characteristics and natures. According to Hanafis, it is true and is based on a wisdom not to read al-Fatiha; and their nature is appropriate for it. Therefore, Imam Shafi decreed from the Quran and the Sunnah that it was necessary to read al-Fatiha behind the imam while Abu Hanifa decreed from the same evidences that it was necessary not to read al-Fatiha behind the imam. The evidences that are available include both decrees. Each imam deduced the decree that was in accordance with the nature of the people living in their own regions from those evidences. Allah is pleased with both states.

This issue will be understood fully with the explanations we will make soon. Therefore, I do not want to lengthen the issue.

Now, I will answer the question, “Why are views different though the Quran and the Sunnah are the same?” However, before answering the question, let us explain the reasons for not being able to able understand the disagreement among madhhabs and being astonished by it. Thanks to this, it will be understood easily that this disagreement is an obligatory outcome.   

Why cannot we understand the disagreement among madhhabs?

The biggest cause for not being able to understand the reason for the disagreement among madhhab is a person’s confusing Allah’s words with human words. That is, a human statement can have one or two meanings; therefore, a person thinks Allah’s speech is also like that. However, the eternal speech has the characteristic of including endless meanings. Each word of the Quran is virtually a sea and includes endless meanings. Each mujtahid deduces different meanings from those words and verses and reach different conclusions. Therefore, not to want any disagreement and to want the existence of only one madhhab means to want Allah’s pre-eternal speech to have only a few meanings like human speech and to be unaware of the nature of divine speech. Then, the first thing to correct is to learn the nature of Allah’s pre-eternal speech and not to liken it to human speech. 

To want the existence of only one view in an issue originates from not being able to understand the universality of Islam. For, it is not possible for human beings who have different natures, living conditions, continents, customs, etc. to be subject to the same decrees related to the details of issues. In that case, disagreement is an obligatory outcome of universality.

A- You are right. To want the existence of only one view in an issue is like to accept that all human beings have the same nature and living conditions. However, human beings are different from one another in terms of their nature, living conditions and the regions they live in.   

B- Yes, exactly. To want the existence of only one madhhab originates from not knowing the nature of Allah’s mercy and generosity. For, Allah eased the practice of His religion, showed different decrees that He would consent to and allowed practicing the decree of another madhhab in case of necessity. This is a result of Allah’s mercy and generosity.

A- Yes, our Lord is really merciful and generous related to practicing our religion.

B- To want the existence of only one madhhab means to want to reverse the decree “There is no compulsion in religion”. For, if there were only one decree regarding an issue, it would be very difficult to practice Islam for people. For instance, to touch a woman does not invalidate wudu in Hanafi madhhab but it does in Shafi madhhab. During hajj and umrah, tawaf (circumambulation) and sa’y have to be performed by having wudu; hajjis following Shafi madhhab make wudu by imitating Hanafi madhhab for tawaf and sa’y; thus, when they touch a woman by mistake, their wudu is not invalidated. If there were only one decree and if touching a woman definitely invalidated wudu, it would be very difficult to perform hajj and umrah. Bleeding invalidates wudu in in Hanafi madhhab but it does not in Shafi madhhab. In case of a necessity, a Hanafi person whose wound bleeds or who undergoes an operation makes wudu by imitating Shafi madhhab and performs prayers with this wudu until this bleeding ends. The bleeding will not invalidate his wudu. If there were only one decree regarding the issue and if bleeding definitely invalidated wudu, performing prayers would be very difficult for a person who had a wound, who had a traffic accident, etc., and many people would probably give up performing prayers. Thus, disagreement is a necessary outcome of the fact “There is no compulsion in religion”.

A- Yes, I understand the hadith of the Prophet ‘Difference of opinion in my Community is a mercy‘ better now. If there were only one decree regarding an issue, it would be very difficult for people to practice Islam. 

B- Yes, exactly. To want the existence of only one madhhab is also due to thinking that the Prophet (pbuh) did only one thing while practicing something. However, the Prophet (pbuh) had different practices related to various issues – including the way of performing prayers – and each madhhab imam adopted one of those practices. Besides, there is no disagreement about the issues that the Prophet did not have different practices and about which there was only one nass (verse and hadith). It means disagreement is a result of the different practices of the Prophet 

A- It means the Prophet had only one way of practice regarding the issues that are agreed unanimously and everybody agreed about them. So, the differences originate from different practices of the Prophet.

B- Yes, exactly.

A- Yes, what you say is very reasonable. I have never thought about what you have told me. I have never heard them from anyone. I thought I was a person that knew a lot of things but it is clear that I do not know anything. 

B- It is never too late to mend. You need to thank Allah that you did not die like that and that Allah guided you. Now, we will deal with the reasons for the disagreements among madhhabs. There are various reasons for different views about any issue. We will deal with only one of these reasons: “the possibility of verses and hadiths having different meanings”. I want to give the first example from the chapter of al-Kawthar.

Disagreement caused by verses having different meanings -1

B- Now, let us deal with the disagreement among madhhabs. Now, we will deal with the reasons for the disagreements among madhhabs. There are various reasons for different views about any issue. We will deal with the possibility of verses having different meanings. I want to give the first example from the chapter of al-Kawthar:

The following is stated in the chapter of al-Kawthar: “To thee have We granted the Fount (of Abundance). Therefore to thy Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice. For he who hateth thee, he will be cut off (from Future Hope).” (al-Kawthar: 1-2)

The decree of sacrificing an animal is wajib according to Abu Hanifa and sunnah according to Imam Shafi, Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad. This disagreement astonishes those who do not know about the science of fiqh and makes them say, “How can something be wajib in one madhhab and sunnah in another madhhab?” However, it is possible as we will see now and it is the result of the possibility of a verse having different meanings:

Abu Hanifa explained the first two verses of the chapter of al-Kawthar as follows: The addressee in verse 1 “To thee have We granted the Fount (of Abundance)” is Hz. Muhammad (pbuh). Kawthar (the Fount of Abundance) here is a grant to the Prophet. The addressee in verse 2 “Therefore to your Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice” is the ummah of Muhammad, not Hz. Muhammad alone. What is the ummah ordered here is to perform five daily prayers. The order to sacrifice is for the ummah. Therefore, it is wajib to sacrifice an animal.

A- Yes, so far so good. What did the other madhhab imams say regarding the issue?

B- Imam Shafi and Imamayn (Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad) interpret those verses as follows: The addressee of the both verses of the chapter is Hz. Muhammad (pbuh).  Verse 1 “To thee have We granted the Fount (of Abundance)” expresses the grant given to the Prophet. Verse 2 “Therefore to thy Lord turn in Prayer and Sacrifice” also addresses the Prophet. For, night prayer (tahajjud) was fard for the Prophet. The order “Sacrifice!” in the verse was given to the Prophet personally and sacrificing an animal was rendered fard for the Prophet only. It is Sunnah for the ummah because of being subject to the Prophet.

A- This decree is quite reasonable too. If the addressee in the verses is the Prophet, sacrificing an animal must be fard for the Prophet and sunnah for us, the ummah.

B- As it is seen, it is possible that the addressee of verse 2 is both the ummah of Muhammad and the Prophet himself. The verse can be explained in two ways. The verse before and the verse after it are suitable for such interpretation. If the addressee in verse 2 is the ummah of Muhammad, five daily prayers is meant by the verse and we are ordered to sacrifice animals. However, the view of Imam Shafi and Imamayn is also possible; then, the addressee in verse 2 is the Prophet. In that case, the prayer mentioned in the verse is the night prayer, which is fard for the Prophet, and the order to sacrifice is for the Prophet, not the ummah. Due to this possibility, sacrificing an animal is sunnah for us, not wajib.

As it is seen, the disagreement is not about whether sacrificing an animal is a kind of worshipping or not; it is about the decree of this worshipping. For, as the verse clearly expresses, sacrificing an animal is a kind of worshipping. There is no disagreement about it. The disagreement is about the decree of the worshipping; and the reason for it is the verse having both meanings. Besides, each madhhab imam used hadiths as evidence for their views. In this part, we will not deal with the hadith aspect of the issue since our topic is the disagreement about understanding the Quran.

In that case, not to be able to understand that sacrificing is wajib in a madhhab and sunnah in another and to want the existence of only one decree is a result of being unaware of the nature of divine speech. The pre-eternal speech is not like human speech; therefore, it does not indicate only one meaning.

A- Yes, it is very interesting. I have never listened to such a lesson up to now. I wish I had learned before what you have told me. I regret for the time that passed. This ilm (knowledge) is so nice. 

B- Yes it is. It is nice when we listen to it from the qualified people, without trying to interpret it ourselves. The qualified people are the scholars. Let us deal with the second example about the verses of the Quran including different meanings:

The following is stated in verse 97 of the chapter of Aal-i Imran: “…whoever enters it (the Kaaba) attains security...”

According to Abu Hanifa, if a person who needs to be killed according to the Shari’ah takes refuge in the Kaaba, he is not harmed and punished there. The only thing to do is to force him to leave the Kaaba by depriving him of food and drink and to punish him when he comes out.  

According to Imam Shafi, if such a person takes refuge in the Kaaba and does not come out, he is punished there, without waiting for him to come out.  

A- The verse says, ‘whoever enters it (the Kaaba) attains security’. However, Abu Hanifa and Imam Shafi deduced two different decrees from the verse. What is the reason for the disagreement?

B- It is a case that will astonish those who do not know the science of fiqh and the nature of pre-eternal speech.  
Two different decrees related to the same issue! However, if a person knows the nature of divine speech, he will understand that these different decrees are normal and that it is a characteristic of pre-eternal speech. Now, let us find out the reason for the disagreement:

The verse says, “whoever enters it (the Kaaba) attains security”. The “security” mentioned in the verse is worldly security according to Abu Hanifa and a person who enters the Kaaba must be free of all kinds of worldly dangers. According to Abu Hanifa, life security is one of them. In that case, if a person who needs to be punished according to the shari’ah takes refuge in the Kaaba, he is not harmed. For, Allah states in his book that a person who enters the Kaaba attains security.   

A- Yes, if we understand the security in the verse as worldly security, life security must be included in it. In that case, if a person who needs to be punished takes refuge in the Kaaba, he must not be harmed. What does Imam Shafi say regarding the issue?

B- Imam Shafi interpreted the “security” mentioned in the verse as being free from torture in the hereafter. That is, according to Imam Shafi, a person who enters the Kaaba becomes free of otherworldly dangers, not the worldly ones. The circumambulation (tawaf), sa’y and the other worshipping performed by a person enables that person to be forgiven by Allah and is saved from the torture of Hell.  Therefore, according to Imam Shafi, the decree of the verse is related to the hereafter, not to the world. Consequently, if a person who needs to be punished takes refuge in the Kaaba, he is ordered to come out; if he does not come out, he is punished there.  

A- Yes, if the security in the verse is understood as being free from torture in the hereafter, the decree “if a person who needs to be punished takes refuge in the Kaaba, he is ordered to come out; if he does not come out, he is punished there” is right.   

B- As it is seen, the possibility of the word “security” in the verse having different meanings causes the verse to have different meanings. If the “security” in the verse is worldly security, a person is not punished there. Abu Hanifa preferred this possibility. If the “security” in the verse is being free from torture in the hereafter, punishment can take place there. Imam Shafi preferred this possibility. Besides, each madhhab imam used hadiths as evidence for their views. In this part, we will not deal with the hadith aspect of the issue since our topic is the disagreement about understanding the Quran. 

A- Yes, I understand it better that Allah’s speech does not have only one meaning, unlike human speech. Therefore, different decrees can be deduced from the same verse. 

B- Yes, exactly. It means to want the existence of only one decree related to “whether a person who takes refuge in the Kaaba can be punished there or not” is due to not knowing these two aspects of the verse and due to thinking that Allah’s speech is a speech like human speech having only one meaning. If you say, “Which one of these decrees is right?”, we answered that question before. We can say that Allah Almighty is pleased with both decrees.  

A- I get excited as you talk. I had read the verse that you explained before but none of what you told me came to my mind. I see that the verse has such deep meanings. Will you give another example? I take pleasure as if I am eating honey when I listen to you.  

B- May Allah not deprive you of your enthusiasm and pleasure! Since you take so much pleasure from learning, I will give you one more example. The following is stated in verse 11 of the chapter of an-Nisa: “ …(The distribution in all cases ('s) after the payment of legacies and debts.”

Allah Almighty expresses how inheritance is to be shared in verse 11 and 12 of the chapter of an-Nisa and states that debts are to be paid before sharing. According to this verse, the debts of a person who dies are paid before the inheritance is shared; and his will, if he has, is fulfilled from one-third of his wealth. After that, the remaining wealth is shared among the inheritors in the way that Allah states.    

Abu Hanifa interpreted the word “dayn” (debt) as “debts to people”. According to Abu Hanifa, the debts of a person to other people are taken from the inheritance and paid to the creditors even if he does not state it in his will. However, debts like zakah and hajj, which are the rights of Allah, are not taken from the inheritance if the person does not state it in his will. Accordingly, if a person does not state in his will that rights of Allah should be paid from his inheritance and if the inheritors do not want to pay those debts of their own accord, debts related to Allah are not taken from the inheritance and these debts are not paid.

A- That is, Abu Hanifa interpreted the word “dayn” (debt) in the verse as “debts to people” and says that the debts of a person who dies to people are taken from the inheritance paid to the creditors even if he does not mention it in his will if the person does not have a will and that debts like zakah and hajj, which are the rights of Allah, are not taken from the inheritance if the person does not mention it in his will. For, he interprets the word debt as debts to people. Is there a different decree regarding the issue? What do the other madhhab imams say regarding the issue?

B- Imam Shafii interpreted the word “dayn” (debt) in the verse as “debts to both people and Allah”. According to Imam Shafii, debts like zakah and hajj, which are the rights of Allah, are taken from the inheritance even if the person does not state it in his will. It does not matter whether the inheritors give permission regarding the issue or not. 

A- Yes, if we accept the word ‘debt’ as debts to both people and Allah, it is necessary to take debts like zakah and hajj, which are the rights of Allah, from the inheritance even if the person does not state it in his will as Imam Shafii says. 

B- The meaning of the word “dayn” in the verse being left as general and its possibility of having two meanings causes disagreement about the decree. If it had been stated in the verse clearly as “after the debts to people are paid” or as “after the debts to both people and Allah are paid”, there would be no disagreement since the verse would be clear. It means since the verse has a general meaning, it includes both meanings. Besides, each madhhab imam used hadiths as evidence for their views.

A- Yes, since the verse has a general meaning, it includes both meanings and causes two different decrees to emerge.

B- Yes, exactly. Consequently, we say that as the nature of the pre-eternal speech is understood, it will be realized better that disagreement is an obligatory outcome. For, to want the existence of only one decree related to “whether it is necessary to take the debts to Allah from the inheritance if it is not stated in the will” originates from not knowing that the word “debt” in the verse includes both meanings.  

A- This example was very nice. As you tell them, I think that there are so many issues that I do not know and have never heard in the Quran.

B- May our Lord teach us what we do not know and enable us to act in accordance what we know! You excitement makes me excited too. Let me give you another example: The following is stated in verse 90 of the chapter of al-Maida:

Disagreement caused by verses having different meanings -2

B- The following is stated in verse 90 of the chapter of al-Maida: "O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper."

Another issue about which there is disagreement is whether eau de cologne can be used and whether it is permissible to perform prayers with clothes smeared with eau de cologne. According to Abu Hanifa and Imam Abu Yusuf, it is permissible to perform prayers with clothes smeared with eau de cologne. According to Imam Muhammad and the other madhhab imams, it is not permissible to use eau de cologne and to perform prayers with clothes smeared with eau de cologne.

This disagreement astonishes those who are unaware of the science of fiqh and misgives some people. The one responsible for this astonishment and suspicion is the person himself. That is, he is guilty. If he had spent some time studying religious sciences, he would not have had that suspicion and would not have been overcome by delusions. For, as you will see now, when the reason for disagreement is explained and understood, there will be no doubt and delusion regarding the issue.

Allah states that intoxicants are an abomination by saying, "O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper." It is known that it is fard to be free from impurities in prayer. That is, the clothes of the person who will perform prayers and the place where he performs prayers must be clean. It is not permissible to perform prayers with dirty clothes. We will deal with the reason for the disagreement:

The Arabic word translated as "intoxicant" is "hamr". Allah states in the verse that "hamr" is dirty. Since the decree of the verse is clear, there is no disagreement about the dirtiness of "hamr". Hamr is dirty according to four madhhabs. The disagreement is about what hamr is. For, it is not clearly mentioned what hamr is in the verse.

According to Abu Hanifa and Imam Abu Yusuf, hamr is the name of the intoxicating drink that is made from grapes and that is let aside without being boiled and that becomes sharp by forming foams. The other alcoholic drinks are called "nabidh". It is haram to drink nabidh like hamr. However, nabidh is not dirty. What is haram is the intoxicant that is made from grapes. Therefore, if some intoxicant made from nabidh smears a person's clothes, it does not invalidate prayer since nabidh is not dirty. What invalidates prayer is hamr smearing a person's clothes. Eau de cologne is made of nabidh, not hamr. It is haram to drink it but it is not dirty. It is permissible to use it, and it does not invalidate prayer when it smears a person's clothes.

According to Imam Muhammad and three madhhab imams, hamr is the name of every intoxicant; it does not have to be produced from grapes. Therefore, all intoxicants are dirty and they invalidate prayer. The alcohol in eau de cologne is   intoxicant and it is hamr. Then, it is not permissible to use it and to perform prayers with clothes smeared by it. 

To sum up, according to Imam Abu Hanifa and Imam Abu Yusuf, eau de cologne does not invalidate prayer because the alcohol in eau de cologne is not produced from grapes. That is, it is not hamr but nabidh. Nabidh is clean, not dirty. 

According to Imam Muhammad and three madhhab imams, eau de cologne does not invalidate prayer because hamr is not the name of the alcohol produced from grapes only, but the name of every intoxicant. Since the alcohol in eau de cologne is intoxicant, it is hamr. Hamr is dirty as the verse states it. Being freed from dirty things is one of the fards of prayer. Therefore, eau de cologne invalidates prayer. 

As it is seen, the disagreement is about the meaning of hamr; it is not about "whether hamr is clean or dirty". For, the phrase "hamr is dirty" mentioned in the verse does not leave any open door for ijtihad. Ijtihad is not in question for things whose decrees are stated clearly. The verse clearly states that hamr is dirty. What is unclear is what hamr is. 

Different decrees emerged due to the disagreement about the meaning of the word "hamr". To say "The religion is one; therefore, the decree must be one" originates from not knowing this deep meaning of ‘hamr' and its inclusion of both decrees.

A- Yes, I understand it. Different decrees emerged due to the disagreement about the meaning of the word ‘hamr'. To want the existence of one decree originates from not knowing that this word has different meanings. Based on which decree shall we practice?

B- You can use eau de cologne by preferring rukhsah (permission) and you can perform prayers with clothes smeared by eau de cologne. However, it is better to act upon taqwa (piety) and azimah (enforcement), and not to use eau de cologne. Those who use eau de cologne can prefer taqwa by washing the organs that touched eau de cologne before performing a prayer.

A- I had heard the issue "whether using eau de cologne is permissible or not" and I had laughed at it. When you have explained the issue in detail, I am surprised and feel a bit angry. I feel angry with those who did not teach us about them.

B- You are right to be angry. The people who are really in charge of this duty have forgotten about their duty and we fulfill it. I thank my Lord, who enabled us to do it. Let me give you another example:

The following is stated in verse 6 of the chapter of al-Maida: "O ye who believe! When ye prepare for prayer, wash your faces, and your hands (and arms) to the elbows; Rub your heads (with water); and (wash) your feet to the ankles."

The four fard deeds of wudu are stated in that verse. We will deal with the deed of washing the face here. The verse clearly orders us to wash the face. Since the decree of the verse is clear, it is fard to wash the face while making wudu in all four madhhabs. There is no disagreement about it. The disagreement is about what the face covers and whether the ears are included in the face. The reason for this disagreement is due to the fact that the boundaries of the face is not stated in the verse.

According to Hanbali madhhab, it is wajib to wipe the ears while making wudu. Hanbalis show the hadith "The ears are part of the head" and that the Prophet's wiping his ears in every wudu as evidence for it.

According to the other three madhhabs, it is Sunnah to wipe the ears. The scholars of the other three madhhabs regard the hadith "The ears are part of the head" shown by Hanbalis as weak. Ibn Salah even says, "There are a lot of signs of weakness about this hadith. It is not strengthened because it is reported through several ways" Imam Shawkani says, "The hadiths regarding the issue do not confirm this issue; they only indicate that it is mustahab. Only a clear evidence can make something wajib."

As it is seen, the disagreement about the boundaries of the face caused the disagreement about the decree. Hanbalis say it is wajib to wipe the face acting upon the hadith "The ears are part of the head". However, Hanafi, Shafi and Maliki madhhabs say it is Sunnah to wipe the ears decreeing that the hadith about the ears is weak. 

A- It means you say that the disagreement about the boundaries of the face caused the disagreement about the decree.

B- Yes, exactly. I want to attract attention to the following point: There is no disagreement that it is fard to wash the face while making wudu. For, the decree of the verse is clear. There is no place for ijtihad here. There is also no disagreement about wiping the ears while making wudu because the Prophet (pbuh) wiped his ears while making wudu. The disagreement is related to the decree of wiping the ears. It is wajib according to Hanbalis but it is Sunnah according to the other three madhhabs. One of the following things was necessary for the non-existence of this disagreement:

1. If the boundaries of the face had been stated clearly in the verse, there would have been no disagreement.
2. If the hadith "The ears are part of the head" had not been weak but mutawatir, there would have been no disagreement.
3. OR, if there had been another mutawatir hadith regarding the issue, there would have been no disagreement.

It means the reason for disagreement is the general decree in the Quran and the Sunnah.

A- My Allah! There are so many treasures in the verses of the Quran!

B- There are treasures but the keys to those treasures have been given to real scholars. We reach those treasures to some extent by reading their works. Alhamdulillah!

There are some more verses I want to show you. However, I refer them to the e-book so as not to bore the listeners. You can examine the other examples by downloading the work about madhhabs from the link under this video.

A- Inshaallah I will download and examine them. We have mentioned the disagreement related to understanding verses of the Quran up to now. The same thing is probably valid related to hadiths. Is that right.

B- Yes it is. That is, words including various meanings are in question for hadiths too. However, I do not want to deal with this issue now so as not to bore our listeners. If you want to see them too, you can enter the website www.seyrangah.tv and examine those hadiths and their analyses by downloading the e-book of this work from the link under this video.

A- Indeed, the disagreement among madhhabs is full of wisdoms and the issue is clear. However, since people do not know about what you have explained, they think the disagreement is a fault. I understand from what you have told me that ilm (knowledge) is necessary for all Muslims. I see that problems are easily solved thanks to ilm.

B- There are other reasons for the disagreements among madhhabs too. I refer to those reasons to the books of fiqh methodology. If you wish, you can apply to those books and find out about those reasons.

A- Inshaallah I will learn them too. By the way, I want you to answer another question. This is my question:

Why do some people today claim to be superior to the Companions and mujtahids?
What is the reason for this claim of superiority to the Companions and mujtahids?
Who makes those claims?

Who claims to be superior to the Companions and mujtahids?  

A- I will ask you one more question. I wonder about something. Why do some people today claim to be superior to the Companions and mujtahids? What is the reason for this claim of superiority to the Companions and mujtahids? Who makes those claims?

B- There are 4 groups who claim to be superior to the Companions and equal to mujtahid scholars:

The first group consists of people who are very conceited, who have left the circle of taqwa, who have indulged in haram things and who do not even fulfill fards. Those people propagate their idea of having no madhhab under the cause of being equal to those great mujtahid scholars and they fulfill their irreligiousness under the cause of superiority to the Companions. 

The reason for the claim of superiority to mujtahid scholars by people having no madhhab: Those people having no madhhab commit haram deeds, follow their desires and become addicted to harams; they cannot get rid of sins and cannot perform the fard deeds that prevent sins. They speak as follows in order to find an excuse: “This issue is ijtihad. Madhhabs disagree with one another regarding this issue. In that case, it is unnecessary to act in accordance with that decree. Besides, they are human beings like us; they might make mistakes. We can make ijtihad like them too; we can worship as we wish. Why do we have to be subject to them?” Those unfortunate people take their heads out of the chain of madhhab with this delusion of Satan’s. It means the main reason for denying madhhabs is the desire to introduce an Islam that is in accordance with their souls because the Islamic decrees are hard for their souls. They want a religion in which there are no orders like five daily prayers, zakah, sacrificing animals and tasattur (hijab), and in which debauchery and the desires of the soul are permissible. 

However, this is not the only thing. For, what is on the shoulders of madhhab imams is only the theoretical part of the religion; not fards and harams. However, people with no madhhab want to abandon and change even the fards of the religion. When they say, “we are better than them”, it is not enough. For, mujtahids can interfere in theories and make ijtihad related to the details that are not definite, not in fards. In fact, those people with no madhhab hardly perform five daily prayers; some of them reduce the five daily prayers to two. The women among them deny the orders of the religion like hijab and sharing inheritance, and oppose fards of Islam. Then, their problem is not only denying mujtahids. For, they attack the Companions, who are the carriers and supporters of Islamic decrees and the narrators of hadiths and dare to deny the hadiths reported by them.

A- Subhanallah! I have always wondered what a person living in this age wants from the Companions and why he attacks them. I see what they want now. They want to deny the hadiths in order to understand the Quran based on their own desires. In order to deny hadiths, they attack the Companions, who are the narrators and carriers of those hadiths and try to defame them. It is a very dangerous disease.  

B- Yes, exactly. In that case, we can list the steps that end in having no madhhab as follows:

1. A person indulges in sins and cannot save himself from sins. He cannot perform the fards that prevent sins.
2. He wants the haram deeds that he commits to be halal and the fard deeds that he cannot perform not to be fards.
3. With the motive of this desire, he attacks mujtahid imams and says, “I can make ijtihad like them; they are human beings like me.” Thus, he makes ijtihad based on the desire of his soul.
4. However, he sees that it is not enough to deny mujtahids. For, they deduced decrees from the Quran and the Sunnah, from the theoretical part of the religion. Ijtihad was not made and cannot made related to the fards of the religion. In fact, this person is away from performing the fards of the religion. This time, he looks at a higher level and attacks the Companions, who are the carriers and supports of the religious decrees and the narrators of hadiths. He accuses them of telling lies – God forbid – and denies hadiths.
5. However, he does not find it enough. For, there are clear Quranic verses about fards. This time, he looks at a higher level, the Quran. He interprets its verses as he wishes. He deduces decrees based on the desires of his soul. In the end, he becomes a poor person without madhhab who does not even deserve compassion.  

Alas! All people of truth agree unanimously that let alone these animals in the form of human beings, real people, the great saints, who are the most perfect people among real men have not even been equal to the ordinary Companions. A person who closes his eyes to the sun makes it the night only for himself.

A- Yes, you are right. It is really unfortunate to speak like that for the Companions who are praised in the Quran. Who is the 2^nd group?

B- The 2^nd group that claims to be superior to the Companions and mujtahid scholars is the poor group that regard themselves as scholars. They have studied some ilm and this ilm has brought about egoism and conceit in them. They try to prove the inferiority of the Companions and mujtahids in order to show their superiority. Their state is like the state of the candle challenging the sun: The candle is jealous of the sun and attacks the sun in order to prove so to speak the superiority of its light and says, “O people! Do you call what the sun has a light? Look at my light. My light is bigger than that of the sun. Come and be enlightened with my light.”

With those words, the candle can deceive those who do not know the sun. Those people think that the candle is the sun because they do not know about the sun. 

Similarly, some people without madhhab today challenge the knowledge of mujtahids, which is like the sun, with their knowledge, which is like a candle. They say we are more knowledgeable than them; follow us, not them. 

We do not know whether we should be surprised by or laugh at those people, who do not have even 500 hadiths in their memory, when they challenge the mujtahids who memorized 500.000 hadiths with their chains of narrators.

A- I am astonished now. It means the real ilm is to know one’s place first before knowing something. They despise the Companions and mujtahids in order to show their superiority. Is that right? It is very bad. Who is the 3^rd group? 

B- The 3^nd group that claims to be superior to the Companions and mujtahid scholars is the members of the wrong madhhabs, which are outside Ahl as-Sunnah. The reason why they attack the Companions and mujtahids is as follows: They see that their creed is different from that of the Companions. The hadiths reported from the Companions and the decrees deduced by mujtahids from the hadiths are opposite to their faith. Instead of abandoning their wrong beliefs, they attack the Companions and mujtahids and claim to be superior to them. They say, “They are human beings like us. Such and such Companions that reported these hadiths are such and such people. It is not possible to trust in what they say. These hadiths are fabricated. Mujtahids made mistakes and made wrong ijtihads. That is the case.”

This 3^rd group tries to refute the Companions and mujtahids and their words by attacking them in order to put across their wrong creeds. They attack the Companions, who tell the truth, and despise mujtahids in order to propagate their wrong ideas.

A- Yes, I think this group is the most dangerous. For, they show themselves as people practicing Islam and being on the true path. They attract the interest of people by doing so; then, they try to show their wrong creed as the true creed. It is easy to be deceived by and to follow these people if one does not have knowledge. Therefore, I say ilm, ilm and ilm.

B- Hereby, we want to warn them and address them as follows: O unfortunate people! How can you attack and despise the Companions of the Messenger of Allah? Have you not heard the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah about his Companions? What will happen to you when those distinguished Companions get hold of you on the Day of Judgment? Are you not afraid of it? Come and give up this treachery and repent before it is too late!  

A- Who is the 4^th group that claims to be superior to the Companions and mujtahid scholars?

B- The 4th group that claims to be superior to the Companions and mujtahid scholars is as follows:

“Those who love the life of this world more than the Hereafter, who hinder (men) from the Path of Allah and seek therein something crooked: they are astray by a long distance.” The chapter of Ibrahim: 3

This 4^th group is the people hired by the powers that are contrary to Islam. Their only duty is to spread mischief among Muslims and to harm the creed of Muslims. In return for this duty, they receive worldly rewards from the powers that hire them. They sell their religion for the world. Our Lord will definitely question them; He will melt the gold and silver they get and sear their bodies in hellfire.

A- This is probably what they call selling the religion in return for the world. When a person has no belief, this is what happens to him. 

B- May Allah Almighty protect you, me and the ummah of Muhammad from the mischief of these 4 groups!

A- Amin! May Allah be pleased with you! You have taught me many things and became a means to guide me to the true path. Do you have anything else to say me?

B- There are some other questions that are asked about madhhabs: “Can ijtihad be made today?” “Why cannot a great saint reach the level of an ordinary Companion?” It is stated in some hadiths that some believers and people of taqwa will be in the same level as and higher than the Companions during the time when bid’ahs become widespread. What is the meaning of those hadiths if it is not possible to reach the level of the Companions? “Is it permissible to imitate another madhhab?” If you want to learn the answers to those questions and read a short compilation about the lives of madhhab imams, you can enter the website www.seyrangah.tv, download and read the e-book of this work from the link under this video. My last word to you is this: We became a means to guide you to the true path with the permission of Allah. You can be a means for the guidance of others by trying to spread this work. Regard this service to the religion as an opportunity!  May Allah be pleased with us and those who serve this religion sincerely! May He make us His slaves and members of the ummah of Muhammad! May He make this work atone for our sins! May He not deprive us from the honor of serving this religion because of our mistakes!

Hanafi madhhab originated in Iraq and became the main fiqh madhhab in the country during the caliphate of Abbasids. This madhhab spread toward the east and developed in Khorasan and Mawaraunnahr. Many famous Hanafi fiqh scholars were from the countries in those regions. In Maghrib, Hanafis and Malikis co-existed until the 5^th century. Hanafis were prevalent in Sicily. After Abbasids, there was a recession in Hanafi madhhab but it started to develop again with the foundation of the Ottoman State. Judges following Hanafi madhhab were sent even to the places whose people followed another madhhab in the Ottoman land from Istanbul, which enabled Hanafi madhhab to assume an official identity in those places (for instance, Egypt and Tunisia).

Today, Hanafi madhhab is prevalent in Central Asian countries and regions like Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkistan, Bukhara and Samarkand. Turks living in Turkey and Balkan countries, and the Muslims in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Greece, Bulgaria and Romania are generally Hanafis today. Some Muslims living in Hejaz, Syria and Aden region of Yemen are also Hanafis. (Abu Zahra, Abu Hanifa, translated by O, Keskioğlu, Ist. 1966, p. 473 ff)

Shafii madhhab spread especially in Egypt. For, the imam of the madhhab spent the last period of his life there. This madhhab spread in Iraq too because Shafii started to spread his views there. It also spread in Khorasan and Mawaraunnahr via Iraq; it shared fatwa and teaching with Hanafi madhhabs in those regions. However, Hanafi madhhab was prevalent there because it was the official madhhab of Abbasid administration.   

When the administration was overtaken by Ayyubis, Shafii madhhab got stronger and had authority over both people and the state. However, during the era of Mamluks, Sultan Zahir Baybars put forward the view that qadis should be appointed according to four madhhabs and applied this view. However, Shafii madhhab had a superior position even in that era. For instance, the authority to appoint qadis to provincial cities and the right to control the property of orphans and foundations belonged to Shafii madhhab. 

When the Ottomans captured Egypt, Hanafi madhhab became superior. When Muhammad Ali Pasha became dominant in Egypt, he abolished acting upon the other madhhabs except Hanafi madhhab. Shafii madhhab also entered Iran.

There are a lot of people who follow Shafii madhhab among the Muslims of East Anatolia, Caucasia, Azerbaijan, India, Palestine, Ceylon and Malay. The only dominant madhhab in Indonesia is Shafii madhhab. (Abu Zahra, ibid, 358 ff)

The fiqh scholars of Hanbali madhhab were very strong but this madhhab did not spread as it was expected. The people who followed this madhhab were always in minority. They did not form the majority in any Islamic country. However, after the families of Najd and Saud (d 795/1393) became dominant in Hejaz region, Hanbali madhhab became very strong in the Arabian Peninsula.

The reason why this madhhab did not spread very much was as follows: Before Hanbali madhhab was established, Hanafis were dominant in Iraq, Shafiis and Malikis were dominant in Egypt and Malikis were dominant in Maghrib. 

Maliki Madhhab was common in Hejaz at first. However, the number of its followers in this region decreased due to various reasons afterwards. 

Imam Malik's views were transferred to Egypt when he was still alive. Maliki madhhab started to spread to Egypt and settled there thanks to the Egyptian students brought up according to Maliki madhhab. However, Shafii madhhab became dominant there afterwards. Then, people continued acting based on both madhhabs in Egypt; Hanafi madhhab also existed especially as a reference in judicial affairs. However, when Fatimis became dominant in Egypt, Shiite came to the forefront in judiciary and fatwa issues. Fatimis established Jami'ul-Azhar and made it ilm center of Shiite madhhab; they tried to eliminate Sunni madhhabs.

When Fatimi domination was ended by Salahuddin Ayyubi, Ahl as-Sunnah was revived and Shafii madhhab became dominant again. However, Maliki madhhab also became strong thanks to the religious schools (madrasahas) where Maliki fiqh was taught. During the era of Mamluks, all four madhhabs were taken into consideration in judicial affairs. The chief qadi of Egypt was appointed among Shafiis and the second qadi among Malikis. In 1920's, personal law was revised based on Maliki madhhab.

Another area where Maliki madhhab is dominant is Maghrib. Maliki fiqh, which was taken there by Imam Malik's students, became widespread among people with the practices of the serious administrators who did not make decisions without consulting the scholars and who showed respect to fiqh scholars.  

Maliki Madhhab was the madhhab that had the most followers in Andalusia. Awzai madhhab was dominant in Andalusia at first. However, after 200 H, Maliki madhhab started to be dominant in the region. The first person to introduce Maliki madhhab to Andalusia was Ziyad b. Abdurrahman, who was one of the most distinguished students of Imam Malik.  

Maliki madhhab spread in Sicily, Morocco and Sudan; then, it reached Baghdad, Basra and even to Nishabur.

The reasons why Maliki madhhab spread in Egypt, North Africa and Andalusia but did not become active in other regions were as follows: There were no ilm centers and mujtahid imams with circles of education in the region between Andalusia and Madinah unlike the countries in the north and east of Madinah; it was difficult for the students who came from the west to go to the east, where fiqh schools developed.   The students who went to Madinah and were educated by Imam Malik did not feel the need to leave Madinah, which was the center of ilm, and go to the east after finding a master like Imam Malik. It is stated that the reason why Maliki madhhab did not spread much in the north and east was the great activity of ilm in Damascus and Iraq, which were on the way to the north and east; the students who went there to learn ilm became satisfied with the ilm they found there. (see Abu Zahra, ibid, 407 ff)

You should act in accordance with Hanafi madhhab. You do not have to read al-Fatiha and an additional chapter or verses when you follow the imam. You should perform Sunnah prayers too. 

When the imam is Shafii in a congregation whose majority is Shafii, there is no drawback to a Hanafi person to follow the Shafii imam. He does not have to do anything extra. He will perform his prayer based on the rules of his own madhhab. The imam’s performing the prayer with small differences does not affect the prayer of a Hanafi person.  

Qada prayers are performed instead of the sunnahs of the daily prayers. However, it is not appropriate for a person to abandon both qada prayers and sunnah prayers because he has qada prayers.

All of the four Ahl as-Sunnah sects (madhhabs) are right and true. Thus, it is wrong to think that one sect is superior to others.

Different clothes are worn for each season. There is a different medicine for each disease. Likewise, shari’ahs may change with respect to centuries; decrees may change depending on the traditions, lifestyles and abilities of the communities. As a matter of fact, different prophets and shari’ahs were sent to each nation before Islam.

Before our Prophet (PBUH), humans used to live far away from each other and their lifestyles and abilities were mostly like bedouins (nomadic people living in the desert). Therefore, the shari’ahs that were sent were different and were suitable for their states. Different shari’ahs and different prophets were sometimes sent to the people living in the same region and in the same age.

After the advent of our Prophet (PBUH), humans reached a high position in terms of abilities, lifestyle and understanding. Many revolutions and changes occurred in the religious and social life. So, humans reached a state in which they could be taught by one teacher and to act based on a single shari’ah. Therefore, several shari’ahs and prophets were no longer necessary. However, since the lifestyles, traditions and customs of people were not at the same level, different sects were still necessary.

If the majority of the mankind were at the same level in terms of education, culture and lifestyle like the students of a university, it could be possible to mention the unification of the sects. However, the current state of the humanity is not appropriate for it.

As for the wisdom behind the multitude of sects, Badiuzzaman Said Nursi exemplifies the issue as follows:

A certain amount of water is evaluated in five different ways for five different patients:

“The same water governs in five different ways in five ill people of different disposition, thus: for one, the water is a cure for his illness, and according to medicine, necessary. For another, it is like poison for his sickness and harmful, and medically prohibited. For another, it causes a small amount of harm, and is reprehensible medically. For another the water is beneficial and without harm; according to medicine that is sunna for him. And for yet another it is neither harmful nor beneficial; he can drink it with good health, and for him it is medically permissible. Thus, here the truth has become numerous; all five are true. Are you able to say: “The water is only a cure, only necessary, and it governs in no other way?”

“Similarly, impelled by Divine wisdom, the Divine ordinances change according to the schools of law and those who follow them, and they change as truth, and all are true and right.”1

Muslims living in different regions of the world, follow one of the four sects. A Muslim follows one of those true sects, and can practice his deeds and worship according to the ijtihads of that sect. It is not compulsory for a Muslim who follows a sect related to his Islamic life to abide by one certain sect till death. Therefore, he is allowed to change the sect if he wishes. For example, a practitioner of the Hanafi sect may choose the Shafii sect afterwards and vice versa.

However, a person who leaves one sect and takes up another must know the rules of the new sect he/she follows in order to perform the worship and deeds properly. For example, if a Shafii sect member changes to Hanafi, he should at least know the musts of the ablutions (wudu), the cases that annul ablutions, the musts of the prayer (salah). Otherwise, he/she might perform these duties with flaws and make mistakes.

It is possible to change one’s sect completely; it is also possible for a person to act in accordance with another sect related to a certain issue if he/she cannot find a solution in his/her sect. It is permissible. However, this imitation must not stem from an arbitrary desire of the soul. It must be due to a necessity and dire need.

A person who imitates another sect related to a certain issue must consider the following points:

Firstly: If a certain worship or deed is to be imitated in accordance with another sect, that worship or deed must not have been done before. For example, if a practitioner of the Shafii sect remembers after finishing a prayer that he touched his wife before starting that prayer and completes the prayer following the Hanafi sect and saying “My wudu is valid according to Hanafi sect”, that prayer is not valid.

Secondly: An imitator should not resort to combining the different applications that are easy from different sects and act accordingly. Such an act is called “talfik”, which means to do opposite things according to two sects in one issue. Talfik is not permissible. For example, one who makes wudu according to Hanafi sect is regarded to have wudu even if he does not utter the intention for it because intention is not a must for ablution in Hanafi. However, the same person should wipe one fourth of his head according to Hanafi. If this man wipes less than one fourth of his head abiding by the Shafii, this ablution is not valid. It is called talfik, which is not permissible.2

Nonetheless, it is a pious and praised deed to act with respect to harder options of the sects. For example, if a Hanafi sect follower touches his wife, his wudu is still valid but it is invalid according to Shafii sect. However, if this man renews his wudu by imitating Shafii sect, it is azimah, a pious act. Similarly, if a Shafii sect follower renews his wudu when blood comes from any part of his body, it is also azimah.

Likewise, it is azimah, a pious and meritorious act to imitate the view of other sects about sunnah prayers (duas) and similar supererogatory worship which do not exist in Hanafi sect.

The following points must be considered about the issues of ijtihad (the endeavor of a Moslem scholar to derive a rule of divine law from the Quran and Hadith without relying on the views of other scholars) and imitation:

-People are divided into three groups related to imitating an Islamic sect:

First group: The scholars that have reached the level of ijtihad. It is not permissible for those scholars to imitate anyone else.

Second group: Although they are not at the level of absolute ijtihad, they are knowledgeable men that know the method of jurisdiction; and by using the same methods, they can put forward different ideas on certain issues. They are divided into two main groups as mujtahid in sect and mujtahid in issues though they have different levels.

The third group is the ordinary people.

- According to the scholars, ordinary people do not have a sect. Their sect is the fatwa (a religious edict) of the mufti (A Muslim scholar and interpreter of shari'ah law, who can deliver a fatwa) because, a true imitation of a sect in only possible through knowing the views of it. It requires a deep knowledge to decide that a sect’s view is more appropriate. It is obvious that it is a hard issue. It is true not only for ordinary people but also so-called scholars like us. (Ravdatut-Talibin, 4/115-Shamila). -

- The issue of imitating sects did not emerge depending on a certain scholar’s view. Islamic scholars say that there is consensus about the appropriateness of the views of four madhhabs to Ahl as-Sunnah. (See al-Muflih, al-Furu’, 12/202-Shamila) Therefore, it is necessary to practice our religion based on a certain true sect. Nevertheless, it is possible to act based on th view of another true sect in case of a dire need.

- There is no certain ceremony required in order to change one’s sect. And there are no certain rules to fulfill to do it. What matters is to learn the rules of the sect one follows and act in accordance with them.

According to some scholars, there are some conditions for imitating a sect:

1. The sect that is imitated must be a true sect with a set of settled rules and resources.

2. The imitator should know the scientific/scholarly conditions and methods of the issue in question.

3. The issue that is imitated must not be an issue annulled by an official court or mufti.

4. It must not bring together rukhsahs (permissions) from all sects.

5. About the same issue, there must not be a practice opposing to it, while abiding by the same rule another time.

6. The different rules of the sects must not be united. That is to say, one who does not renew his wudu when he touches a lady based on Hanafi sect and does not renew it when blood comes out of his body based on Shafii sect has no valid wudu according to both sects: Hanafi and Shafi.

Those conditions show that the sect of ordinary people is the fatwa of the scholars because all of these conditions require a scientific background.

References:

1) Badiuzzaman Said Nursi. Words  (Istanbul: Sözler Publications, 1987), p. 454-455.
2) Ibn Abidin, Raddul-Muhtar. (Beirut: Ihyaut-Turathil-Arabi) 1:51; as-Sayyid Abi Bakr. Ianatut-Talibin. (Beirut: Ihyaut-Turathil -Arabi) 4:219; Mehmed Paksu İbadet Hayatımız (Our Worshipping Life)

After the martyrdom of Hz. Uthman, great turmoil occurred in the Islamic world. Muawiya, the governor of Damascus, said that he would not pay allegiance to Hz. Ali until the murderers of Hz. Uthman were found. As a result of a chain of incidents, the wars of Jamal and Siffin took place between the Muslims. Thousands of Muslims died in those wars.

Those who supported Hz. Ali during that turmoil and mischief were called “shia” meaning “supporters”. These first Shiites (Shia al-ula) did not reject Hz. Abu Bakr and Hz. Umar. However, Shiism assumed a new dimension afterwards and looked like an independent sect, even sects, separate from Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. Some of those sects went too far and declared Ali as the prophet and even god. They are called ghulat ash-shia.

Shia of Imamiyya accept the view, “Imamate occurs based on nass (verses of the Quran and hadiths).” According to them, Hz. Ali should have been the first caliph. However, his right had been usurped from him. Today’s Shiites mostly belong to this group.

Zaydiyya is the most moderate of the Shiite sects. They say that Hz. Ali should have been the first caliph but they do not reject the caliphate of the other three caliphs. They say “The imamate of the mafdul (less superior) is permissible when the afdal (superior) exists.” Zaydiyya, the Shiite sect that is the closest to the Ahl as-Sunnah, exists in Yemen today. (1)

According to Shia, “Imamate is not a minor issue of interest to be transferred to people; it is an issue of methodology and a pillar of the religion. It is not permissible for the Prophet to neglect such an issue or to refer it to the ummah. Therefore, the caliph to replace the Prophet after him is certain and definite based on nass.” (2)

Most of the Islamic scholars say that there is no nass regarding the issue. Some accept that there is nass (hidden or obvious) about Abu Bakr and regard it as a sign that the Prophet (pbuh) made Hz. Abu Bakr the imam to lead the prayer before his death. Undoubtedly, if there had been clear nass on this great issue, it would have been famous and it would have been known by the Companions who were close to the Prophet (pbuh). In that case, they would not have had any hesitation regarding the issue and they would not have disagreed. (3)

Claiming that Hz. Ali should have been the first caliph, Shia use some nass as evidence for it. For example:

1. “O Messenger. Proclaim the (message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His mission. And Allah will defend thee from men (who mean mischief).” (4)

There is nothing related to Hz. Ali’s caliphate in the verse. As Shawkani states, the verse is general. (5) As a matter of fact, Hz. Aisha said, “If anyone said that Muhammad hid something from what was revealed to him, he would be lying” and recited the verse above. (6)

However, based on some weak and fabricated narrations, (7) Shia state that the verse above declares Hz. Ali’s caliphate. Thus, they accuse the Prophet of not fulfilling his duty properly with those claims. If the verse is as they understand it, it means that the Prophet died without conveying it.

2. When the Prophet set off for an expedition (to Tabuk according to the narration of Suyuti), the Prophet (pbuh) left Hz. Ali in Madinah as his deputy. Hz. Ali said, “Are you leaving me with women and children?” The Prophet replied as follows: “Do you not want to be like the Prophet Musa (Moses) and Harun (Aaron) with me? However, there is no prophet after me.” (8)

The answer of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) indicates the Prophet Musa’s going to Mount Sinai. Musa went to Mount Sinai by leaving his brother Harun as his deputy. Harun is a prophet like his brother Musa.

It is perfectly reasonable to deduce Hz. Ali’s virtue from the above narration and nobody objects to it. However, it is a strained interpretation to conclude from the narration that “the first caliph should have been Hz. Ali”. When the Prophet went on other expeditions, he left others as his deputy. Abdullah b. Umm Maktum, who was visually impaired, was one of them. (8)

3. Bara b. Azib narrates: “We stopped at Ghadir Khum on an expedition. Call to prayer was announced. After the prayer, the Prophet held the hand of Hz. Ali and said, ‘If I am someone’s mawla, Ali is his mawla too. O Allah! Be a friend of his friend and an enemy of his enemy.’” (9)

Even if the narration is accepted as sound, it is not possible to understand the necessity of Hz. Ali’s being the first caliph. (10) For, Hz. Ali is truly one of the most distinguished one among Muslims. He has the title of the Lion of Allah due to his courage. He has the rank of the leadership of saints. He has been the master of all Muslims throughout history due to the distinguished features like them. As Alusi states, if the Prophet had wanted Hz. Ali to become the caliph after him, he would have said, “O people! He is your ruler and your commander after me. Listen to him and obey him.” (11) Such an order would have definitely been fulfilled. It is definitely unthinkable for the Companions, who said, “May my parents be sacrificed for you!” to the Prophet (pbuh) not to obey the Prophet’s order related to such a serious issue. As a matter of fact, When Hz. Abu Bakr said, “I advise Umar after me”, his request was fulfilled; the Muslims paid allegiance to Hz. Umar. (12)

4. One of the narrations Shia rely on is as follows: “When the Prophet’s illness deteriorated before his death, he said, ‘Bring me a pen and paper, I will dictate my will so that you will not go astray after me.’ When Hz. Umar said, “The Prophet’s illness deteriorated. Allah’s Book is sufficient for us”, people started to argue. The Prophet said, “Go away from me. It does not fit you to argue in my presence.” (13)

According to the claim of the Shia, the Prophet wanted to dictate Hz. Ali’s name as his caliph but Hz. Umar prevented it. (14) However, there is no indication of it in the narration mentioned above. Evaluating the narration in that way is a strained interpretation.

5. “No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin.” (15)

According to a narration, when the verse above was revealed, the Prophet was asked, “O Messenger of Allah! Who are your relatives that are necessary for us to love?” He said, “Ali, Fatima and their sons.” (16)

This verse above is mentioned by Shia as proof of love for Ahl al-Bayt. Although it is possible to accept it as an implied meaning, there is no indication of it in the clear meaning of the verse.

Ibn Abbas was asked about that verse. Before he answered, Said b. Jubayr, who was there, said “Aal-i Muhammad” Ibn Abbas said, “You have hurried up; Quraysh has no family with which the Prophet did not have any kinship. The meaning of the verse is “Take care of the right of kinship at least.” (17)

Ibn Kathir attracts attention to the following meaning in the interpretation of the verse: “If you do not help me, do not harass me because of the kinship between us at least.” (18)

The following comment of Ibn Kathir is worth mentioning:

The narration “What is meant by the verse is ‘Hz. Ali, Fatima and their sons’” has a weak chain of narrators. Besides, it is in a chapter that was revealed in Makkah. Fatima had no children in Makkah. She married Hz. Ali in the second year of the Migration after the Battle of Badr. However, not accepting the narration does not mean not loving Aal-i Muhammad. They came from a clean offspring, from the most honorable house in the world in terms of honor and lineage. (19)

Fakhruddin Razi attracts attention to the narrations “My Ahl al-Bayt is like Noah’s Ark. The one who embarks it will be saved” and “My Companions are like stars. You will attain guidance if you follow any of them” (20) and makes the following comment:

“Now we are in the sea of ​​responsibility. Waves of doubt and lust are hitting us. Those who travel in the sea need two things:

1) A sound ship.
2) Luminous stars.

So, those who embark such a ship and look at the stars have a great hope of salvation. Ahl as-Sunnah have embarked the ship of Ahl al-Bayt love and have been sailing by looking at the stars of the Companions.” (21)

Ahl as-Sunnah does not have a problem of not loving Ahl al-Bayt. We pray for them in tashahhud of each prayer and we love them truly. (22) Names such as “Ali, Hasan, Husayn, Fatima...” are very common among Ahl as-Sunnah.

Imam Shafii states the following in one of his couplets: “If loving Aal-i Muhammad is regarded as Rafidite (an extreme branch of Shia), let all humans and jinn know that I am a Rafidi.” (23)

However, as Alusi points out, most people go to extreme ends about Ahl al-Bayt. The middle way is sirat al-mustaqim (straight path). (24)

Ahl al-Bayt is a term used about the family members of the Prophet and it means members of the family. That term is mentioned in two verses in the Quran: One of them is related to the family of the Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham). (25) The second one comes after the verses addressing the wives of the Prophet and is as follows:  

“And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance; and establish regular Prayer, and give regular Charity; and obey Allah and His Messenger. And Allah only wishes to remove all abomination from you, ye members of the Family, and to make you pure and spotless.” (26)

Hamdi Yazır attracts attention to an extreme attitude of Shia while explaining the verse as follows:

“Shia did not even take into account azwaj tahirat (the wives of the Prophet), which is the topic of the verse above, and wanted to insist that Ahl al-Bayt consisted of the Prophet himself, Hz. Ali, Hasan, Husayn and Fatima; therefore, they caused a lot of fuss in the history of Islam. Although Salman al-Farisi is regarded among Ahl al-Bayt with the special expression of the hadith ‘Salman is from me, he is from my Ahl al-Bayt’ (27), it is a strange fanaticism not to accept the Prophet’s wives, who went to bed with him, as members of Ahl al-Bayt.” (28)

The Prophet states the following in one of his statements about his Ahl al-Bayt: “I have left with you two things. As long as you hold fast onto them, you will never go astray: the Book of Allah and my Ahl al-Bayt.” (29)

Said Nursi states that what is meant by Ahl al-Bayt in terms of the duty of prophethood is the Sunnah of the Prophet. “So, no one who abandoned his practices could truly be a member of Ahl al-Bayt, nor could such a person be a true friend to Ahl al-Bayt.” (30)

We should not forget that the Prophet said to his daughter, Fatima, “O Fatima! Save yourself from the fire with your deeds. Otherwise, I cannot save you from the fire.” (31) As a matter of fact, the wives of the Prophet Nuh (Noah) and Lut (Lot) could not be saved since they did not believe. (32) Similarly, when one of the sons the Prophet Nuh did not believe, he was drowned in the Deluge. God Almighty said to the Prophet Nuh, “He is not of thy family.” (33) It is in terms of belief, not lineage. Since being the wife and son of a prophet is not enough to attain salvation, it cannot be claimed that people will attain salvation just because of being from Ahl al-Bayt.

References:

1. see Ashari, Abul- Hasan, Maqalatul-Islamiyyin, Maktabatul-Asriyya, Beirut, 1990, I, 65-66, 88-89 and 131; Abdülhamid, İrfan, İslamda İtikadi Mezhepler ve Akaid Esasları, Transl. M. Saim Yeprem, Marifet Yay. İst. 1981, pp. 16-57; Kılavuz, Saim, İslam Akaidi ve Kelama Giriş, Ensar Neş. İst. 1993, pp. 308-311.
2. Shahristani, Muhammad b. Abdulkarim, Al-Milal wan-Nihal, Tashih wa Taliq: Ahmad Fahmi Muhammad, Darul-Kutubil- Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1992, pp. 144-145.
3. Taftazani, Saduddin, Sharhul-Maqasid, Alamul-Kutub, Beirut, 1989, V, 258-259.
4. Al-Maida, 67.
5. Shawkani, Muhammad, Fathul-Qadir, Daru Ihyait-Turathil-Arabi, Beirut, nd. II, 59. See also Qurtubi, VI, 157.
6. Bukhari, Tafsir, 5/7; Shawkani, II, 59.
7. see Shawkani, II, 59-60.
8. Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 20; Suyuti, Jalaluddin, Tarihul-Khulafa, Darul-Kutubil-Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1988, p. 133.
9. see Hamidullah, Muhammad, İslamın Hukuk İlmine Yardımları, İst. 1962, pp. 142-143.
10. Ibnu Hanbal, IV, 281; Suyuti, Tarikhul-Hulafa, p. 134; Alusi, VI, 192-193.
11. see Onat, Hasan, Emeviler Devri Şii Hareketleri ve Günümüz Şiiliği, TDV. Yay. Ankara, 1993, p. 24.
12. Alusi, Abul-Fadl, Ruhul-Maani, Daru Ihyait-Turathil-Arabi, Beirut, 1985, VI, 195.
13. Suyuti, Tarikhul-Khulafa, p. 62-64.
14. Bukhari, Marda, 17; Muslim, Wasaya, 22; Ibn Hanbal, I, 325.
15. Naim, Ahmet, Tecrid-i Sarih Tercemesi ve Şerhi, Diyanet Yay. Ankara, 1982, I, 108. Ahmet Naim analyzes the narrations regarding the issue very well in this work. You can refer to it for more information.
16. ash-Shura, 23.
17. Baydawi, Qadi, Anwarut-Tanzil wa Asrarut-Tawil, Darul-Kutubil-Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1988, II, 362.
18. Qurtubi, XVI, 15-16; Ibnu Kathir, VII, 187; Suyuti, Durrul-Mansur, Darul-Maktabil- Ilmiyya, Beirut, 1990, V, 699.
19. Ibnu Kathir, VII, 187.
20. ibid. VII, 189.
21. Ajluni, I, 132.
22. Razi, XXVII, 167.
23. Razi, XXVII, 166.
24: Alusi, XXV, 32.
25. Hud, 73.
26. al-Ahzab, 33.
27. Ibnu Hisham, Siratun-Nabawiyya, Daru Ihyait-Turathil-Arabi, Beirut, 1971, III, 224; Hakim, Abu Abdullah (Nisaburi) Mustadrak, Matbaatul-Islamiyya, Beirut, II, 416.
28. Yazır, Hamdi, Hak Dini Kuran Dili, VI, 3892.
29. Tirmidhi, Manaqib, 31; Ibn Hanbal, III, 14, 17.
30. Nursi, Lemalar, Sözler Yay. İst. 1990, p. 22.
31. Muslim, Iman, 348.
32. at-Tahrim, 10.
33. Hud, 45-46.

Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab (d. 1792), who lived in Iran and Iraq when he was young, who studied philosophy along with Islamic sciences and who was a Sufi, was influenced by Ibn Taymiyya afterwards.

Ibn Abdulwahhab chose a secluded part of the Arabian Peninsula to spread his views. Feeling that political support was necessary for the realization of the reform, he contacted, Muhammad b. Saud, the Emir of Dariyya, explained his ideas to him, persuaded him and gained his full support.

When he died in 1792 - Ibn Saud had died 33 years ago - the reform had become successful and spread throughout the Peninsula. During the periods of the Emir’s son Abdulaziz and grandson Saud, the new movement spread beyond the Peninsula. The movement challenged the Ottomans, and entered Iraq, Syria and Haramayn.

Wahhabis attacked Karbala in 1801 and destroyed all the holy places, including Hz. Husayn’s grave.

The Ottoman State saw that the movement was against them both politically and intellectually and that it spread dangerously; therefore, it assigned Mehmed Ali Pasha, the Governor of Egypt to struggle against them and also started severe propaganda against them.

Mehmed Ali Pasha defeated the Wahhabi forces and drove them to the inner parts of the Peninsula; thus, the new movement’s establishing a stated was delayed for a hundred years; however, the movement continued its development and expansion by performing its propaganda and publicity activities in the meantime.

This movement, which was later called “Wahhabism”, emerged when popular Sufism became the most important factor and as a reaction to the ethical collapse into which the Islamic Ummah gradually fell due to it and various additional reasons. The Western countries, which were hostile to the Ottoman State, especially England, supported this movement for their own treacherous policies.

According to Ibn Abdulwahhab, “Help needs to be asked only from a living person. It is also permissible for a person to ask his Muslim brother to pray for him; however, making a request from a dead person or someone who is not there (sheikh, imam) is regarded as polytheism (shirk). Therefore, all kinds of prayers (duas) such as referring to intermediaries and intercessors between a person and Allah in this worldly life and taking shelter in a person’s spiritual power need to be rejected. It is polytheism to travel to visit the graves of people known as saints, to hang things on their tombs to ask something, to mention their names with expressions of honor, and to ask them for the acceptance of prayers. He is against those who reject intercession, such as Mu’tazila and Kharijites, and those who consider it a right that the Prophet has.... It is stated in several hadiths that the Messenger of Allah will ask permission from Allah to intercede for not only the righteous people but also the disobedient people from his ummah. However, intercession belongs only to Allah, and the Messenger of Allah will be able to intercede only with His permission. Therefore, in order to attain the intercession of the Prophet, intercession needs to be asked from Allah. What the Companions understood from making tawassul to Allah through the prayer (dua) of the Messenger of Allah was permissible when he was alive; when he died, the Companions left it and asked his uncle Abbas to pray for them. Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab opposes common Sufi views, rejects spiritual ranks such as ghaws, aqtab, awtad and abdal, and regards them as bid’ahs that are haram…” (For more information, see TDV İslam Ans.)

According to the beliefs and deeds of Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab we have summarized above, he is outside Ahl as-Sunnah but calling him an unbeliever is a big mistake.

Today, his followers in their homeland have kept their mouths shut due to the political situation; they cannot make the harsh warnings they do to the weak to the current administration; however, their influence continues in the world and they divide the ummah; they exclude the great people of sunnah and propagate that they are the only people of Ahl as-Sunnah.

Our duty is to act wisely and try to put the fire out instead of blowing the coals.

For more information, please click on the link given below;

Who is Muhammad b. Abdulwahhab?

Many people in my country follow the teams of Sufi and Ahl al-Hadith madhhabs. However, there is always a rivalry between them. Can we do something to bring about peace and harmony between them and to live together like Muslim brothers?

- If those who are under the control of Wahhabism, known as Salafism today, accuse Sufi people of polytheism, it is not possible to bring them together. In this respect, first of all, those who say they are salafis must accept the principles accepted by Ahl as-Sunnah such as intercession and karamah.

It is a big mistake to call true Sufism polytheism by using personal mistakes made in the name of Sufism as an excuse; it is necessary to abandon it.

- There is no contradiction between true Salafism and true Sufism.

- The way to reconcile Muslims who think differently is possible by following these principles:

1. To act positively, that is, out of love for one’s own outlook, avoiding enmity for other outlooks, not criticizing them, interfering in their beliefs and sciences, or in any way concerning oneself with them.

2. To unite within the fold of Islam, irrespective of particular outlook, remembering those numerous ties of unity that evoke love, brotherhood and concord,

3. To adopt the just rule of conduct that the follower of any right outlook has the right to say, “My outlook is true, or the best,” but not that “My outlook alone is true,” or that “My outlook alone is good,” thus implying the falsity or repugnance of all other outlooks,

4. To consider that union with the people of truth is a cause of divine succour and the high dignity of religion,

5. To realize that the individual resistance of the most powerful person against the attacks through its genius of the mighty collective force of the people of misguidance and falsehood, which arises from their solidarity, will inevitably be defeated, and through the union of the people of truth, to create a joint and collective force also, in order to preserve justice and right in the face of that fearsome collective force of misguidance,

6. In order to preserve truth from the assaults of falsehood,

7. To abandon the self and its egoism,

8. And give up the mistaken concept of self-pride,

9. And cease from all insignificant feelings aroused by rivalry. (Nursi, 20. Lema, 2. Sebep)

Sunnism, which constitutes the majority of the Islamic world, is not just a name, attribute or sect, but a whole lifestyle, which is the practice of Islam in life in accordance with the Book and the Sunnah.

Those who adhere to Ahl as-Sunnah are called "Sunni", meaning "those who adopt sound and true faith".

The word Sunni probably emerged toward the end of the first century of the Migration (early 8th century AD) for the first time according to a narration attributed to Said b. Jubayr (d. 95/713). (Fığlalı, Çağımızda Îtikadî İslâm Mezhepleri, p. 54)

Members of Ahl as-Sunnah are also mentioned with various phrases with the addition of the one of the words “hadith, jama’ah, istiqamah, haqq, iman, ithbat” to the word "ahl" and with terms "sifatiyya" (those who adopt divine attributes), "firqa an-najiya" (the group that attains salvation) and “as-sawad al-a’zam” (great majority).

The oldest work that includes the term Ahl as-Sunnah among the sources that have survived to the present day is ar-Rad alaz-Zanadiqa wal-Jahmiyya (p. 96) attributed to Ahmad b. Hanbal.

It is followed by Darimi’s as-Sunan (Muqaddima, 23), Muslim’s Sahih (Muqaddima, 1), Ibn Shazan an-Nisaburi’s al-Izah (pp. 93-94) and Ibn Qutayba’s al-Ikhtilaf fil-Lafz, (pp. 67-68).

The information above proves that Ahl as-Sunnah formed as a sect of creed in the 3rd century H (9th century AD); in other words, the conservative majority began to be called by this name after the emergence of ahl al-bid’ah.

Ikhtilaf (disagreement) means putting forward different views regarding an issue or the existence of more than one different view and decree about it. If it occurs regarding an issue that is permissible and if the owners of the different views do not act bigotedly in a way that will break the unity of the ummah, it is regarded as ikhtilaf (disagreement) not as tafriqa (discord / dispute). If  difference of opinion occurs related to a field or issue about which the Book and the Sunnah has a clear decree or if it occurs in a field that is open to ijtihad but if there is a bigotry that does not regard other views legitimate, a discord / dispute that “the religion does not regard permissible”occurs. Imam Shafii expresses the important difference between those two concepts as follows:

"It is not permissible for a person to put forward a different view related to a decree Allah expressed with clear and definite evidence in His Book or the Prophet (pbuh) expressed with clear and definite evidence. If a person expresses a view related to an issue that is open to interpretation and that can be reached through interpretation or qiyas (analogy), he is not treated as if he put forward a view against a definite and clear nass. In the Quran, Allah condemns only those who fall into dispute about the decrees that were expressed definitely and clearly."1

In the Quran, Allah rendered five daily prayers and hijab (tasattur) fard in the Quran and prohibited opening awrah places; different views cannot be put forward and different decrees cannot be mentioned related to those issues. Interest is rendered haram clearly and definitely in the Quran; it is not possible to discuss whether interest is haram or not; different views cannot be put forward.

As for the issues whose decrees are not explained clearly in the Quran and the Sunnah, ijtihad (qiyas, istihsan, istislah....) is made about them. It is permissible to put forward different views and to make different ijtihads regarding the issue. More than one view and decree that will occur like that is ease and mercy for the ummah because the ruler can choose one of them and enact it as a law; that is, there will be more than one option for the ruler to choose. Individuals will fulfill their duty of worship by acting based on one of them – if they are not mujtahids. When they have difficulty, they can ask fatwa from qualified people and act based on other views and ijtihads. 

If we want to give an example from the Quran related to the rule above, we can deal with the issue of interest. Several verses prohibit interest using the term "riba". However, they do not express in detail when what items are exchanged, interest will occur. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) mentioned six items (wheat, barley, gold, silver, dates, salt) and said that interest occurred when they are exchanged in certain ways. It is left to ijtihad in what other items (in addition to these six items) interest is in question. Different views and ijtihads to be put forward while determining those items are permissible and legitimate; they are not regarded as discord.

Belief of oneness enables man to have the habit of having a stability in his heart, tongue and deeds. Therefore, the verse "Show us the straight way"(1/6) in the chapter of al-Fatiha, which we read in every prayer, is the reflection of the desire for man to turn toward what is true, good and nice and to keep away from all kinds of aberration. Jabir Ibn Abdullah narrates how the Prophet (pbuh) explained the phrase "the true path" (as-Siratul-Mustaqim) to the Companions as follows:2

"We were together with the Messenger of Allah (pbuh). He drew a line on the ground. He drew two more lines on the right and two more lines on the left of that line. Then, he put his hand on the line in the middle and said: This is the way of Allah. Then, he read the following verse: "Verily, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not (other) paths: they will scatter you about from His (great) path..."(6/153).

Siratul-Mustaqim is the way of a moderate ummah, away from extremisms. That is, it is the way that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and his Companions followed. It is stated in the Quran that "we have to follow the way of Allah, to hold fast by His rope, not to be divided among ourselves and to live in unity." Some of those verses are as follows:

“And hold fast, all together, by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves...” (Aal-i Imran, 3/103).

"And obey Allah and His Messenger; and fall into no disputes, lest ye lose heart and your power depart..." (al-Anfal, 8/46).

Footnotes:

1. Imam Shafii, Risala, p. 560-561.
2. Ibn Majah, Muhammad b. Yazid, Sunan, Cairo, 1372, Muqaddima 1, vol. 1, p. 6.

Madhhabs have different views related to fards. For instance, all madhhabs unanimously agree that wudu is fard. However, the issue of what things are fard while making wudu is controversial. That is, it is essential in all madhhabs that wudu is fard. However, there are differences in details. Similarly, it is fard to perform prayers in all madhhabs. However, there are some differences about what things are fard while performing prayers. 

Madhhab imams disagreed about the way the Islamic issues were applied, not in the issues themselves, based on justifiable reasons according to them. For instance, all imams agree unanimously that it is fard to wipe the head while making wudu but they disagreed about the style and amount of wiping.  

In the order of our Lord, who rendered wudu fard for us, “wipe your heads”, the phrase “bi ruusikum” is used. In Arabic, which is the richest language, the preposition 'bi' is sometimes used “to embellish” the word, sometimes to mean “some” and sometimes to mean to “abut”, to “adjoin“. The madhhab imams understood the preposition 'bi' before the word “ruusikum” differently and different practices occurred. The preposition 'bi' here can have all of the three meanings mentioned above.  

Therefore, Imam Malik said, “While wiping the head, all of it should be wiped. This is because the preposition “bi” here is used for embellishing the word. It does not have a meaning on its own.”

Imam Abu Hanifa said, “That ‘bi’ means ‘some’. Thus, it is sufficient if some part of the head is wiped.”

Imam Shafii said, “That ‘bi’ means ‘to abut on’. It is acceptable if only the hand abuts on the head and touches a few hairs.”

In that case, it becomes clear that each madhhab imam is on the true path and that the decrees in details that seem to be disagreements are not an issue of disagreement. Thus, the claims of those who have bad intentions will turn out to be baseless... (Ahmed Şahin, Hayat ve Biz, 235)

By the way, despite taking the same law into consideration, some courts give decrees that are opposite to each other related to the same issue due to the differences of understanding. Nobody says, “Why is this so?” Criticizing madhhabs due to differences is not compatible with good intentions and the reality.

The principles of Islam and belief are clear. Accordingly, regardless of the name, everyone who believes in those principles is a Muslim. It is not appropriate to accuse a sect or a madhhab of unbelief under a name.

* * *
Some information about the emergence of Shia, which is not a true madhhab and which is not regarded as Ahl as-Sunnah, and its thoughts are as follows:

When the Quran, which is the greatest torch of guidance, was sent down, a new era started in the whole realm of humanity. People were happy due to reaching “the true religion”, which is a natural need for the hearts and spirits of people. They reached oneness from polytheism, the light from darkness, the truth from superstitions, and knowledge from ignorance. The live principles of the Quran led them to material and spiritual loftiness all the time. The Bedouins of the past reached the level to teach civilization to humanity. Muslims were spreading the light of belief and wisdom to the whole humanity with a dazzling effort and devotion. Despite all the oppression and torture, deceit and betrayal, and tricks, people who came under that light of guidance were increasing and getting stronger day by day. The true religion was shining with a great light, progressing and rising. Islam was spreading by conquering hearts; signs indicating that belief would defeat unbelief, the truth would defeat the falsehood, oneness would defeat polytheism and justice would defeat oppression started to be seen.

Indeed, it turned out to be so. During the time of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), Islam became dominant in Makkah, Madinah, Hejaz and the surrounding areas. The age of ignorance and darkness was replaced by the age of happiness and light.

Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Iran were captured thanks to the unique conquests made in a short time during the caliphate of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra). That magnificent development increased the envy and hatred of the enemies of Islam, especially the Jews (1).

Throughout history, Jews have been a tricky nation skilled in causing discord and separation, and dividing the people of the truth. They opposed the divine will in every period and did not hesitate to kill their prophets. They are a harmful nation that plots all kinds of revolutions and directs and manages all committees of mischief, and whose main purpose is to break the peace, ethics and creed of humanity. No nation could keep up with them in terms of mischief and hypocrisy. It would be appropriate to call them “evil-commanding soul of humanity”. As the Quran remarks with the statement, “Duribat alayhimuz-zillatu wal maskanatu (shame and destitution were pitched on them)”, Jews were marked with a brand of shame and destitution that they could not be able to erase until Doomsday.

The Jews were appalled by the great development of Islam in a short time and their brains seemed to be cracked. Moreover, th fact that many Jewish communities became Muslims drove them completely crazy. They wanted to stop that fast and bright spread of Islam. At that rate, Islam would spread to the whole world and Judaism would disappear. Jewish existence of a few thousand years would come to an end. Jews faced such a “danger of extinction” with the advent of Christianity, six and a half centuries before Islam. At first, they made great efforts to eliminate Christianity, and later, when they realized that they could not defeat the members of that new religion by using force, they resorted to tricks and intrigue:

They used Saul, who was a scholar and philosopher of Jews, to demolish the basic foundations of Christianity and replace it with their own invented superstitions. That clever Jewish gentleman pretended to be converted to Christianity, and changed his name to Paul; he retired to a church and led an ascetic life for a long time. He strictly followed the rules of the Christian religion and gradually gained the trust of people. In the end, he gained the love and tolerance of Christians to such an extent that they began to respect him like an apostle. Paul knew well how to use that love in a very tricky way to corrupt Christianity. He succeeded in convincing people that he had met Jesus (pbuh) and received instructions from Him. As a result of his intense and planned efforts, he managed both to make Christians deviate from their creed and worship and to bring about some false sects and groups. (2)

“Unity (oneness)” was replaced by “trinity”, that is, Christians started to attribute deity to the Jesus (pbuh) and to Mary, instead of one deity.

However, the danger the Jews encountered in the face of the rapid spread of Islam was much greater than before. It was impossible for Jews to resist this new religion because the development ability of Islam was extraordinary. The religion of Islam affected the hearts because it is compatible with reason and logic. It seemed certain that not only the Jews of Yemen but all Israelites would melt in the face of this rising Islamic sun. In that case, it needed to be prevented at any cost.

The trick, which was once planned against Christians, needed to be played against Muslims. They held long negotiations and finally put Ibn Saba on the stage in Madinah (3).

Ibn Saba established his destruction program on two main principles. First of all, he was to prevent the development of Islam by causing divisions among Muslims. In the second phase, he was to include superstitions in the Islamic belief and creed, and to create a difference of opinion among Muslims that would last until Doomsday. He was to establish secret committees to achieve those two goals and work intensely to eliminate the spirit of unity among Muslims by weakening the spiritual ties such as love and fraternity. After each stage of mischief, the situation was to be evaluated immediately, the results achieved with the planned targets were to be checked, new plans were to be made and put into effect in order to achieve new targets under changing and developing conditions.

Ibn Saba and his friends decided to disguise as sincere Muslims and virtuous believers in order to influence the people. In that phase, Ibn Saba managed to play his role in a unique way. He went to the mosque before anyone else in the morning prayers and left the mosque after everyone else at night. He prayed a lot, fasted most days and was always busy with dhikr. He made attractive speeches wherever he went and displayed himself as the most sincere and loyal worrier of Islam. He chatted a lot with the Companions, especially with Ali (ra) and made them trust in him. On the one hand, he showed his virtue and taqwa to people; on the other hand, he found outsiders who could not adapt to the environment and talked to them secretly. He influenced some of those people by benefitting from their ambition for office and position, some from their personal anger, and some from racial superiority, making them problematic individuals.

Afterwards, he decided to expand his activities outside Madinah and to provoke people against the caliphate by contacting the men he had previously sent there. Unfortunately, the social structure of that period was well suited to the spread of those destructive ideas. There were issues that could be exploited against the state. One of them was the Hashemite-Umayyad rivalry. The fact that the majority of the statesmen were from the Umayyads was a source of uneasiness and hence an important factor of provocation for the Hashemites. Another issue that can be used was that Muhajirs were given more duties than Ansar in state affairs.

Ibn Saba went on a trip to benefit from all those and similar opportunities. He went to Basra first. He established contacts with people who were not satisfied with the state there through his secret committee he had previously sent there. When his activities attracted the attention of the Governor Abdullah bin Amr, he went to Kufa. The fact that some people there were against the administration made things easier for Ibn Saba; he organized his secret committee in a short time and set off for Damascus. He could not find what he wanted in Damascus because the state affairs were regular and there were not many issues he could provoke. Then, he went to Egypt. Unfortunately, he found more than what he wanted there because there were various groups that were against the state administrators there. Ibn Saba gathered those scattered groups under one roof at the end of his great efforts and made them ready for action against Uthman (ra).

After that stage, he became engaged in a new and intense activity to initiate an uprising against Uthman (ra), the Caliph, by sending a list of slanders he prepared to his men in other Islamic provinces and gave them the following instruction: “Start by denigrating all the officials of the state. Enable people to see that you are engaged in ‘enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil’. Earn the respect and love of the people.”

He constantly sent letters to various provinces and especially to Basra and Kufa. In those letters, he exaggerated administrative and political issues with lies and slanders. He tried to give the impression in those letters that Uthman (ra) and his governors oppressed and persecuted people and that all provinces were in a terrible disorder. His aim was to inculcate people with the idea that the regions except Madinah gradually moved away from the Islamic line, that anarchy became widespread in all Islamic regions, and that the caliph was indifferent to and incapable of solving those issues.

When news of sedition and mischief reached Medina, Uthman (ra) sent reliable and respected delegations to various provinces with the help of Ali (ra) to examine the situation. Those delegations stated in their reports that the situation was not as propagated, and that, on the contrary, peace and tranquility prevailed in the whole country. Uthman (ra) did not find the reports of the delegations enough and called all governors to Madinah for consultation. He exchanged ideas with them. There was really no major problem., However, as a precaution, he warned the governors to treat people well. Nevertheless, mischief did not stop because the enemy was secret and insidious, working based on a plan. There was no clear enemy to struggle. People were pushed into mischief more and more every day.

During those disorders, Ibn Saba founded the Sabaiyya madhhab, the first seed of Shia (4). Thus, he took a big step in realizing his treacherous plan. That madhhab would constitute the basis of the groups that would break up Islam in the future.

Ibn Saba found enough supporters in Egypt for the madhhab that he established and conditioned them against Uthman (ra) fully. Then, it was time to determine a new candidate for the caliphate and to kill Uthman (ra). At that point, he started with the following plan: “Uthman (ra) was a flawed and faulty person. If anyone who would replace him was a flawed person, the problems would not be solved and oppression and injustice would not be prevented. In that case, the most important point was that the person to replace him had to be an innocent and infallible person. That infallible person was Ali (ra), who grew up under the control of the Prophet (pbuh) since his childhood, became mature with his discipline and education, and inherited his knowledge and perfection. Every prophet had a vizier and Ali was the vizier of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra) and Uthman (ra) usurped his right of succession.”

In order to strengthen his cause, Ibn Saba portrayed Ali (ra) as one the heroes of old fairy tales, suggesting that he was a superhuman with some superstitions and stories; thus, he gradually made the people around him an admirer of Ali (ra).

Ibn Saba implemented his plans stage by stage. It was to time to reclaim Ali (ra)’s right. He used the following method of inculcation to do it:  

“Every prophet has an heir. The Prophet (pbuh) appointed Ali (ra) as his heir. There can be no crime bigger than not fulfilling the will of the Prophet. Besides, the Prophet (pbuh) will come back to the earth like the Prophet Isa (Jesus) and ask, ‘Why did you not fulfill my will?’’ Then we will all be embarrassed and disappointed ... “(5)

When he influenced the feelings and excitement of the people well enough with such suggestions, he decided to raid Madinah and kill Uthman (ra). Ibn Saba gathered his men, whom he mobilized by pretending to go to hajj, in Maywa near Madinah. They planned to enter Madinah at the earliest opportunity and try to kill Uthman (ra).

In order to give the impression that the murder was committed by the Hashemites, the Egyptians were to gather around Ali (ra) and seemingly defend Ali’s right so that the Umayyads and the Hashemites would confront each other and hence a civil war would begin.

Ibn Saba had sent false letters with the signatures of Aisha (ra), Ali (ra), Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) to his men in centers such as Basra, Egypt and Kufa beforehand and wanted them to remove Uthman (ra) from the caliphate. The secret committees of Ibn Saba deceived many people with those letters. Thus, they got stronger and set out; they joined Ibn Saba’s group near Madinah. With those new forces, the number of Ibn Saba’s bandits reached around three thousand.

Egyptians applied to Ali (ra), the people of Basra to Talha 8ra) and the people of Kufa to Zubayr 8ra) and said,

“We read your letters; we want to kill Osman, to restore the ummah back to peace and to make you to the head of the state.”

They said that such a letter had not been written by them, that there was a fraud about it and advised them return to their hometown immediately. This time, the rebels went to Uthman (ra).

Thereupon, Uthman (ra) gathered the rebels and all people of Madinah in the mosque with the help of Ali (ra). He listened to everyone’s complaints. He said to them:

“We will take your complaints into consideration; we will try to correct the issues that you think are wrong. Feel comfortable ...”

Meanwhile, the rebels demanded the removal of the Egyptian governor. Uthman (ra) asked them whom they wanted as the governor. They said,

“We want Abu Bakr’s son Muhammad.” Uthman (ra) accepted their request and appointed Muhammad at once.

Consequently, all parties began to return, having been satisfied. Ibn Saba was very disturbed by that situation. He prepared a devilish plan to make the returning Egyptian caravans come back to Madinah and to make them aggressors.

He wrote a letter addressing the governor of Egypt on behalf of Uthman (ra).

He stamped a fake seal on behalf of Uthman (ra) and gave it to one of his militants and made him set off after the Egyptian caravan. He caught up with the caravan on his camel and drew attention to himself by doing some suspicious acts based on the plan. Eventually, the people in the caravan suspected that man and caught him; they found the letter. That was what the man wanted.

In the letter, the governor of Egypt was ordered as follows: “When these rebels come, kill their leaders and imprison the rest.” The rebels who found out what was written in that letter were suddenly shocked and agitated again; they raided Madinah again. Despite the efforts of Ali (ra), Zubayr (ra) and Talha (ra) to calm them, they raided the house of Uthman (ra) and martyred him while he was reading the Quran.

The murderer of Uthman (ra) was al-Ghafiqi, a Yemenite Jew. With the martyrdom of Uthman (ra), Ibn Saba covered a great distance on the way of his cause. The seeds of discord started to yield fruit. That deplorable incident prevented the Muslims from spreading Islam to other countries. The period of conquest and conveying the message of Islam ended; a period of stagnation and conflict started.

After that stage, Ibn Saba prepared a new plan to make the Hashemites and the Umayyads fight each other. He provoked the Umayyads by spreading a rumor that Ali (ra) got Uthman (ra) killed and that he wanted to replace Uthman (ra) since Uthman (ra) was from the Umayyads and Ali (ra) was from the Hashemites. While the followers of Ibn Saba were slandering Ali like that, they were also trying openly to make Ali (ra) the Caliph; thus, they wanted to make people believe their slander

To this end, Ibn Saba chose a group of delegates led by Ibn Maymun, a Jew, from the caravan coming from Egypt and sent them to Ali (ra). The delegates said to Ali (ra), “As you know, the ummah has been left leaderless. You deserve to be the Caliph the most. We would like you to undertake this duty.” Ali (ra) refused their offer and sent them away.

When Ali (ra) responded to them like that, Ibn Saba sent a group of delegates from the people of Kufa to Zubayr and a group of delegates from the people of Basra to Talha. Both of them rejected their offer of being the Caliph just like Ali (ra) did.

When Ibn Saba could not get what he wanted from them, he said to Ghafiqi, who led the group of aggressors, “Gather all of the people of Madinah in the mosque and tell them to choose a Caliph at once. Otherwise, threaten all of them with your swords...”

The rebels led by Ghafiqi gathered the people of Madinah in the mosque as Ibn Saba ordered and said to them, “Choose a leader for yourselves immediately. If you do not do it today, we will kill you all with our swords including Ali, Zubayr and Talha.” Having heard that threat, the people of Madinah went to Ali (ra) and asked him to accept to be the Caliph. Considering the disorder and chaos, Ali (ra) had to accept their offer although he did not want to.

After a while, Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) went to Ali (ra) and asked him to act in accordance with the decrees of the Quran and punish the murderers of Uthman (ra). Ali (ra) addressed them as follows:

“You are right but the state has not suppressed the rebels fully yet. It is necessary to wait until the state dominates fully...”

Ali (ra) wanted to determine the criminals one by one, question them and then punish them. Aisha (ra), Zubayr (ra) and Talha (ra) held this view:

“The mischief has increased and targeted the state; the Caliph was martyred. The issue is not the issue of finding the murderers of Uthman (ra) only. Most of those who joined this movement of mischief must be killed. Therefore, the rebels must be punished at once.”

Acting upon the verse in the Quran: “Wa la taziru waziratun wizra ukhra” (Nor can a bearer of burdens bear another’s burden)”, Ali (ra) said, “No one could be held responsible for the mistake of others”, and did not agree with them (4).

After finding out about the view of Ali (ra), Zubayr (ra) and Talha (ra) went to Makkah and had a meeting with Aisha (ra) there. They decided to go to Basra in order to gather armed people to attack the rebels.   

When Ali (ra) found out that Aisha (ra), Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) went to Basra, he left for Basra with his army because he did not want a break-up or separation in the state and encamped in a place called Ziqar. Ali (ra) sent an envoy called Qa’qa to Aisha (ra), Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) to settle the issue peacefully; he told his envoy to tell them about the evil of dissension and separation, the importance of unity and accord, and the fact that it would be better to settle everything peacefully. Qa’qa went to Aisha (ra), Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) and told them the views of Ali (ra), explaining that the remedy for that disorder was calmness, and that after the calmness all kinds of measures could be taken and that otherwise there would be discord, mischief and disorder, which would cause great trouble among Muslims. They said, “If Ali holds those views, there is no disagreement between him and us.” 

Both parties were pleased about the result. Thus, stability and calmness prevailed. Everybody went back to their tents.

Ibn Saba, the hypocrite, was very disturbed by this peace; he gathered his followers and said, “We must do something to start a fight and make Muslims kill each other. If we cannot do it, our efforts will be fruitless; we will not be able to reach our target.” They made a new plan to start a war. In accordance with the plan to be carried out very early in the morning, Ibn Saba positioned his men around the tents of Ali (ra), and Zubayr (ra) and Talha (ra). Later, they attacked the tents of both parties. Zubayr (ra) and Talha (ra) woke up to the noise and asked, “What is the matter? What is happening?” The men of Ibn Saba said, “Ali’s men (people of Kufa) attacked us at night.”

Thereupon, Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) said, “We see it now. Ali was not sincere when he wanted to prevent the war.” On the other hand, Ali (ra), who heard the noise asked, “What is happening?”  The men of Ibn Saba said, “The other party attacked us at night and we drove them back.”  Ali (ra) said, “I see. Talha and Zubayr did not agree with us about peace.” Then, the Battle of Jamal, which claimed the lives of ten thousand people, took place. Talha (ra) and Zubayr (ra) were martyred. Thus, Ibn Saba covered a great distance toward his aim after the murder of Uthman (ra).  

Ali (ra) stayed in Basra for a while after the Incident of Camel. Then, he went to Kufa from there. Most of the Muslims, from Morocco to the Chinese border paid allegiance to Ali (ra). Only Syrian Muslims did not pay allegiance.

Ali (ra) preferred the method of peace to ensure the allegiance of Muawiya, the Governor of Damascus, and hence Syria; he sent Muawiya a man named Jarir as an envoy.

Upon Ali (ra)’s attempt to settle the matter through peace, Ibn Saba, took action again as usual to block the way of peace because if peace was made, Ali (ra) would deal with the supporters of Ibn Saba as the first thing, and when the criminals were identified, their end would be very bad. Thus, if both sides were to made peace on a basis, the rebels would definitely be defeated. Therefore, they had to prevent peace and make the parties fight. Ibn Saba and his friends were waiting for something that would make things favorable for them. As a matter of fact, the course of events turned out to be favorable for them because Muawiya did not accept Ali (ra)’s offer. As a result, both sides completed their war preparations and confronted each other in Siffin in the month of Muharram.

However, Ali (ra) and Muawiya made a one-month ceasefire so as not to fight in that month. Ali (ra) sent delegations again to Muawiya for peace, taking advantage of the ceasefire.

Ibn Saba included his men such as the son of Adiyy b. Hatim and Sabt among the delegations that were sent in order to prevent war. Those men threatened Muawiya with an aggressive language and prevented a possible peace by uttering provocative words against him such as “You will be worse than those who were defeated in the Incident of Camel ...”.

On the other hand, Ibn Saba and his men were encouraging Ali (ra)’s army to start war as soon as possible and telling them, “The people of Damascus will be defeated like the ones in the Incident of Camel”. Consequently, the parties confronted each other again and the Battle of Siffin took place.

Ibn Saba was getting closer to his main purpose with those civil wars because his main purpose was to distort the creed of Islam by including superstitions in it.

The Believers who fought today could make peace tomorrow and re-establish Islamic unity by coming together again. It was necessary to cause a separation among Muslims that could continue until Doomsday, and to separate them in terms of belief and to divide them into factions. The most important thing to do then was to introduce superstitions into the religion in order to divert beliefs from its original form. Ibn Saba started it by exploiting the issue of “Ahl al-Bayt”. He took to the stage as the most ardent supporter of the Ahl al-Bayt. He spread the idea that the caliphate was the right of Ali (ra) and that it was unjustly usurped from him. He tried to show Ali (ra) and his children as a “Dynasty of Gods” and make the religion of Islam deviate from the principle of oneness, just like Christianity. Finally, a group led by Ibn Saba, entered into the presence of Ali (ra) and said to him: “You are our Lord; you are our God.” Ali (ra) had some of those polytheists burned. (6) He gave up the idea of making Ibn Saba burned fearing that it would cause mischief and weakness due to the large number of his followers in the army. He exiled Ibn Saba to Madayin, Iran’s former center of administration.

Unfortunately, Madayin was a very suitable place for the production of the heretic ideas of Ibn Saba. Ibn Saba met with Kharijites who had once escaped from Ali (ra) there, and found their leader, Ibn Abi Awfa. When he realized that Ibn Abi Awfa wanted to act against Ali, he said to him: “You cannot defeat Ali with such an action; you will be defeated.” When Ibn Abi Awfa asked Ibn Saba for his opinion, he said, “We will do it with three assassins.”

After that talk, they agreed on the assassination of Ali, Muawiya and Amr Ibn al-As. They sent three assassins to kill them. They planned to kill three Companions on the 17th day of Ramadan when they would lead the morning prayer. As a twist of fate, Muawiya and Amr Ibn al-As survived the assassination attempt. However, the assassin named Ibn Muljam managed to wound Ali (ra) with a poisonous sword, which caused his martyrdom.

After sending Ibn Muljam to assassinate Ali (ra), Ibn Saba sent Ibn Maymun to Kufa with a few of his men. The duty of Ibn Maymun there was to spread superstitions such as “Ali did not die; he was raised to the sky. Now, he is above the clouds. He will return soon and distribute justice in the world with his sword ...”

Together with his close friends, Ibn Saba prepared the plans of treacherous activities in Iran and started to work. The social situation of that day was very convenient for them to implement those plans:

Islam had spread to a wide area in a very short time. It was an extraordinarily difficult task for the newly established Islamic State to convey all the meanings and subtleties, wisdom and truths of Islam to the nations that had just accepted Islam, and to absorb different tribes with different temperaments in the melting pot of Islam. There was mass participation in Islam in the places where Islam reached. That situation made Muslims happy but the spiritual improvement was inadequate; ideal Muslims could not be brought up. Therefore, the Muslims could not unite in the desired way in the ideal sense and in terms of way of life. Layers of people were like uncultivated land. It was evident particularly in Iran.

The newly converted Muslims were not fully free of their old false beliefs. It was quite difficult for those people whose souls, minds, and hearts were shaped by being under the influence of centuries-old wrong and superstitious beliefs, to accept the clear and pure truths of Islam, which was far from delusions, falsehood and superstitions. Islam could not be properly absorbed by those bigoted people; the true religion could not settle in their hearts and feelings fully. Psychologically, they wanted to continue their old beliefs, customs and traditions along with Islam.

On the other hand, the caliphate could not provide the service of warning and guidance all over the Islamic land at the required level. The service of establishing Islam with all its institutions in those towns and to remove the doubts and hesitations of people was insufficient. For, Islam spread over a wide area; most of the Companions died in internal strife; some of them preferred to live in reclusion; others were too old to interfere with social life.

As a result of the neglect of that important task, those new towns were left unattended for a long time. The people there could not fully understand the truths of the Quran and belief with the first enlightenment and knowledge they received at the time of conquest. Therefore, they were not yet in a position to distinguish between the right and the wrong, superstitions and realities.

Tricky Jews managed to take advantage of that social situation.

An important factor in Ibn Saba’s establishing of negative ideas in Iran was the psychological nature of the people. Feeling rather than mind dominated their inner world. Their hearts were more open to legends and superstitions than the truth. They could not analyze events in compliance with logic and reasoning, and could not meditate on them properly.

On the other hand, they could not accept the elimination of their centuries-long reign and national pride by Arabs, whom they once regarded as slaves; they accepted Islam in their minds but they could not accept it fully in terms of their feelings.  

Ibn Saba knew how to evaluate all those factors. He gathered his friends and addressed them as follows:

“We have just started the real war. Be aware that it is a war that will continue among Muslims until Doomsday. Now, we will sanctify Ali and make others sanctify him. We will sometimes ascribe him ‘divinity’ and we will sometimes say he is a ‘prophet’. We will tell people that ‘the caliphate was the right of Ali, but that Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman usurped his right’.”

After making that decision, Ibn Saba and his friends assigned their men the duty of spreading those ideas. They started to tell people the following: “The caliphate was the right of Ali. Ali and his children are worthy of the caliphate. That right was usurped from them. The three caliphs, especially Umar, opposed the will of Allah by usurping that right. It is necessary to support Ali in order to obey Allah’s will.” When those ideas were accepted by people, they went further and made an effort to include the “Creed of Incarnation”, which attributes divinity to humans, in Islam. They started to spread a belief that was totally opposite to the creed of tawhid (oneness) by diverting the belief of Islam from its original form. The “Creed of Incarnation” was also present in the old religions of Iranians. Therefore, that wrong belief found supporters easily among them.

First, they attributed divinity to Ali (ra). Then, they claimed that this divinity also passed on to his descendants, and as a result, a dynasty of gods emerged in Iran.

When Ali (ra) died, Ibn Saba said, “It is not Ali who died, but a devil disguised as Ali. Ali has now ascended to the heavens and established a throne on the clouds.” Thus, he made an interpretation of his death in parallel with the creed of incarnation.

Thus, Shiism, whose seed was grown with the establishment of the “Sabaiyya Madhhab” in Egypt, started to grow and develop in Iran. More than twenty branches emerged from it.

References:

1. After the Romans expelled the Jews from Palestine in the 70s AD, the tribes of the Jews settled in Arabia, Hejaz and Yemen; they considered those places the Second “Promised Land”. In a short time, they seized the wealth and property of those regions; on the one hand, they were trying to spread Judaism and on the other hand, they exploited the people as much as they could. When the ruler of Yemen accepted Judaism, the Jews started to make their presence felt in Yemen. However, the emergence and rapid spread of Islam worried them. As a matter of fact, with the spread of Islam in and around Hejaz, they were expelled from there as defeated and overwhelmed. That defeat of the Jews in Makkah and Madinah by the Muslims offended the Jews of Yemen deeply.

2. Ziyaeddin Gümüşhanevî, Netaic-i i’tikadiye, p. 86.

3. Abdullah Ibn Saba was a chief rabbi and a great secret militant. He came to Madinah from Yemen during the caliphate of Uthman (ra) and became a Muslim in appearance. He started to sow the first seeds of mischief and conflict there. He made great efforts to destroy Islam from within. The purpose of that Jewish convert was to deviate the religion of Islam by spoiling the Islamic creed, just as Paul did to Christianity, and to make Muslims superstitious people and dreamers. We should immediately state that the hostility of Jews to the religion of Islam started with the birth of the Prophet (pbuh). They were waiting for the advent of the Prophet of the End Times, inspired by the Torah, but they thought that he would come from their own nation. Contrary to their thoughts, when the Prophet of the End Times came from Quraysh, it provoked their grudge and envy. Despite all their efforts, both when the Messenger of Allah was alive and during the caliphate of Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra), they did not succeed in causing even the slightest mischief among the Muslims. They found some opportunities toward the end of the caliphate of Uthman (ra). Ibn Saba also managed to make the best use of those opportunities.

4. Prof. Muhammed Ebû Zehra, Mezhebler Tarihi, p. 39.

5. Ibn Saba succeeded in arousing his followers by making them accept the Christian idea of rij’ah (returning). Ibn Saba said to people, “Why do you not believe in the return of the Prophet though you believe in the return of Jesus Christ? In fact, the following verse informs us that the Prophet will return: “Verily He Who ordained the Quran for thee, will bring thee back to the Place of Return.” Ibn Saba used the verse above as a proof for his idea; and he misled people by suggesting that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) had more right to return than Jesus. However, the meaning of the verse is not as Ibn Saba claimed. The verse in question was revealed during the Migration (Hijrah). When the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) arrived at to a place called al-Juhfa during his migration from Makkah, he felt depressed due to leaving Makkah, where he had been born and raised, and God Almighty revealed that verse to comfort and console His Messenger (pbuh), telling him that he would return to Makkah.

6. Abdurrahman Ibn Ahmad, Sharh al-Mawaqif, p. 624, 1286 H, Ist. Fakhruddin Razi, Muhassilu Kalam, p. 177, 1323 H, Egypt. One day when Ali (R.A.) was leaving his house, he saw a few people of this deviant group prostrating before him, and he asked them what they were doing. When he heard them say to him, “You are Him,” he said in amazement: “Who am I?” They said: “You are Allah, except for whom there is no god.” Thereupon, he became very angry and said: “This is unbelief. Repent of it. Otherwise, I will destroy you” and gave them three days. They refused to repent within the given deadline; thereupon, Ali ordered those perverted men to be burned...

First of all, we know that ahl al-qibla are ahl at-tawhid. If something contrary to this creed occurs in their words and actions, the opinions and ijtihads of the Islamic scholars regarding the issue - based on the knowledge they gained from various verses of the Quran and hadiths - are formulated in two points:

Point One: If an error in a person who is from ahl al-qibla is due to interpretation, he should not be declared as an unbeliever because a wrong interpretation based on a verse or hadith cannot outweigh the sound data showing the person’s belief.

Second Point: As some scholars state, even if a person has 99% probability of having irreligious attributes, if 1% probability shows a firm belief, this man cannot be declared as an unbeliever; he cannot be said to be an unbeliever.

Let us also listen to a wonderful subtlety regarding the issue from Badiuzzaman Said Nursi:

“Some persons who belong to the divisions of the people of misguidance and innovation are found acceptable by the Muslim community, while others, just like them and not apparently different, are rejected. I always used to wonder about this. For example, although someone like Zamakhshari was one of the most bigoted members of the Mu’tazilite sect, the authoritative Sunni scholars did not pronounce him an unbeliever or misguided, despite his severe objections; they rather searched for a way to exonerate him.”

But then they held that Mu’tazilite authorities like Abu Ali Jubba’i, who was far less bigoted than Zamakhshari, should be rejected and refuted. I was curious about this for a long time. Then through divine grace I understood that Zamakhshari’s objections about the Sunnis arose from his love of his way, which he looked on as right. That is to say, for example, in his view God could be truly declared free of all fault and defect by saying that animals create their own actions. It was out of love for declaring God free of all fault that he did not accept the Sunnis’ principles concerning the creation of actions. Whereas the other Mu’tazilite authorities were rejected because their inadequate intelligences could not aspire to the elevated principles of the Sunnis and they could not fit the Sunnis’ extensive laws within their own narrow ideas, and so denied them.” (see Mektubat, pp. 453-454)

It will be very useful to listen to a very careful and very wise lesson of a sharia principle followed by Ahl as-Sunnah in his following statement too:

“There is no command in the Shari’a not to vilify and accuse them of unbelief (that is, there is no Shari’a decree against those who do not vilify and accuse a person of unbelief) but there is a Shari’a decree to vilify and accuse them of unbelief.”

“Vilification and accusing someone of unbelief causes serious harm if it is unjust.  If it is justifiable, there is no good or reward involved. Those who deserve it are innumerable. However, there is no injunction in the Shari’a concerning not vilifying or accusing of unbelief; so, it is not harmful in any way. It is because of this fact that the people of reality, Ahl as-Sunnah, and foremost the Four Imams and the Twelve Imams, took the sacred law based on the above truth as their guide, and did not consider it permissible among Muslims to make that time’s mischief the subject of discussion and debate, saying that to do so was without benefit, and harmful.” (see Emirdağ Lahikası-I, p. 205)

Have a look at the following wise statement:

“There are some verses and hadiths that are specific and are considered to be universal. There are also some that are temporary and are thought to be permanent. There are also some that are conditional and regarded as general. For example, a verse or hadith says that this thing is unbelief. In other words, that attribute does not originate from belief; it is and attribute of unbelief. With that characteristic, it is said that this person became an unbeliever. However, since his attributes originate from belief and since he has other innocent attributes that have the manifestations of belief, that person is not said to be an unbeliever unless it is definitely known that this attribute arises from unbelief because it can also arise from other causes. There is doubt in the signification of the attribute and there is certainty in the existence of belief. And doubt does not cancel the provision of certainty. Let those who hurriedly dare to accuse people of unbelief think!...” (see Sünuhat-Tuluat-İşarat, pp. 16-17)

- The translation of the verse in question is as follows:

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (al-Anam, 6/159)

- According to a narration reported from Ibn Abbas, Mujahid and Qatada, what is meant by "those who divide their religion and break up into sects" is Jews and Christians. Before the religion of Islam emerged, they disagreed among themselves about the prophet of Muhammad’s (pbuh) coming as a prophet. Their attitude is mentioned in the verse. (see Tabari, Razi, the interpretation of the verse in question)

According to another view attributed to Ibn Abbas, they are polytheists because the Arabs before Islam had been divided into various groups of faith. (Razi, the interpretation of the verse in question)

- According to some other scholars, those mentioned in the verse are some people from this ummah who deviate from the right path, and the people of bid'ah who harm the religion by misinterpreting the mutashabih (allegorical(ambiguous) verses in a way to cast doubt on the religion of Islam. (Tabari, ibid)

- Therefore, the different interpretations of the scholars of the four sects who explained the realities of the Quran to the Islamic Ummah are never the ones indicated by that verse. It is known that there have been different interpretations of the verses since the period of the Companions. If we do not attribute the meaning of the verse in question to those who try to destroy the religion, even the Companions will be the target of negative comments, which is sheer nonsense.

The verse above has nothing to do with true madhhabs. As a matter of fact, we are asked to refer to the scholars in another verse:

“If they had only referred it to the Messenger, or to those charged with authority among them, the proper investigators would have Tested it from them (direct).” (an-Nisa, 4/83)

It means the state mentioned in the chapter of ar-Rum has nothing to do with true madhhabs and true mujtahids because it is Allah who orders us to ask those scholars, who states that they will know what we ask them and who confirms it.

Then, what is the state mentioned in the chapter of ar-Rum?

Let us see the translation of verses 31 and 32 of the chapter of Rum first:

“Turn ye back in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not ye among those who join gods with Allah,- Those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects,- each party rejoicing in that which is with itself!”

What is meant by the phrase “those who split up their Religion, and become (mere) Sects...” in the verses above is meant the groups that lost the essence of the religion, substituted their own desires for the religion, and hence broke into small groups - by going beyond the basic principles of the religion. The biggest evidence that they are not related to the four sects is that the four sects are located in a center that represents the vast majority of the Islamic ummah, that is based on the Quran and the Sunnah, and that has educated and trained the greatest scholars and saints for a thousand years, confirming each other in the basic disciplines of the topics of creed and deeds, and representing the collective personality of the Islamic ummah.

Those four sects were named Ahl as-Sunnah and they have been mentioned with that name for about 1,300 years. That fact, alone, is a clear indication that they have followed the path of the Prophet (pbuh) and the Companions.

When it is viewed from the point of view of the groups that are affiliated with Islam but have very different aspects, there are generally two different mentalities. The first one of them is Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah and the second one is Ahl al-Bid’ah. Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah is defined in the hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as “those who adhere to the creed that I and my Companions have”. (Kanzul-Ummal, h. no: 1057) Therefore, those who do not adhere to that creed are regarded as people of bid’ah. They consist of seventy-two sects. Mutazila, Jahmiya, Qadariyya and similar ones are among them.

Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah have two different madhhabs (sects) of creed: Ash’ari and Maturidi. There is no difference between them in terms of basic principles. There are some small differences in details. Therefore, both represent the same group.

According to another hadith of the Prophet (pbuh), those who are defined as Ahl as-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah and Ahl an-Najat are “The ones who form as-sawad al-azam (greatest group) and who walk on the path on which I and my companions are.” (Kanzul-Ummal, h. no:8319)

The concept “as-sawad al-azam” in the hadith means the largest group, the largest congregation. What group is larger than the mass/congregation formed around the four sects with a history of approximately 1,300 years?

The movement of sectlessness (following no madhab) barely has a history two hundred years. If we accept the four madhhabs as ahl al-bid’ah since the sects mentioned in the hadiths are - clearly - labeled as the people of bid’ah, can we talk about an Islamic ummah?

With a very optimistic approach, 90% of this ummah is not in a position to directly deduce Islamic decrees from the Quran. In that case, all those people will either follow the millions of scholars and mujtahids of the four madhhabs or a few people who can never be compared with the scholars of the four madhhabs - in terms of their taqwa, knowledge, or religious wisdom.

Should we imitate Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafii and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal or should we imitate a few people who do not have proper taqwa and do not have proper scientific foresight?

In general, all tafsir scholars, hadith scholars, kalam scholars, fiqh scholars, saints and scholars are people who are affiliated with the four madhhabs.

To sum up, if we regard the members of the four madhhabs, who have made up at least 80-90% of the Islamic ummah for thirteen centuries, as ahl al-bid’ah, what will be the Islamic ummah, the best of the ummahs?

Allah informs us in verse 115 of the chapter of an-Nisa that those who do not follow the path of the ummah will end up in Hell:

“If anyone contends with the Messenger even after guidance has been plainly conveyed to him, and follows a path other than that becoming to men of Faith, We shall leave him in the path he has chosen, and land him in Hell,- what an evil refuge.”