Hakikat Kitabevi Publications No: 10 answer to an enemy of islam

reported unanimously by the Umma cannot be heretical or false.’
The 115th âyat of Sûrat an-Nisâ declares, 
‘We will throw into Hell
the dissenter from the Believers’ path.’ It is improbable and
impossible for the imâms of the four madhhabs and the great
scholars trained by them to have skipped even one hadîth. By
ijmâ’, a hadîth is of mansûkh or ta’wîl if none of them has followed
it.” Hence, when one sees that an ijtihâd of an imâm al-madhhab
is inconsistent with a hadîth, one should say, “The imâm concluded
that it was either mansûkh or ta’wîl,” rather than saying, “He did
not hear or follow it.” The religion reformer, as quoted in the 30th
article, said, “The usûl scholars’ deducing the necessity of taqlîd
from the âyat, 
‘If you do not know, ask those who know!’ is a
fruitless and unsound deduction and reasoning.” Here, however,
he says, “Those who are not experts should obey the âyat, 
‘Those
who do not know should ask those who know!’ and ask those who
are experts.”
39– By making puns upon the words in the twelfth dialogue, the
religion reformer tries to deceive Muslims:
“When al-Imâm ash-Shâfi’î said to a person who asked
him a question, ‘Rasûlullah said so,’ the person said, ‘And
you, too, admit this decision, don’t you?’ Al-Imâm ash-
Shâfi’î said, ‘If I do not venerate the statement that comes
from Rasûlullah down to me, which part of the earth will
accept me?’ Therefore, imâms prohibited taqlîd and
showed the door to ijtihâd. An ijtihâd disagreeing with a
hadîth will be put aside. Al-Imâm ash-Shâfi’î always said, ‘If
you find any sahîh hadîth, let me know so that I can practise
it!’ It is not permissible to attribute a statement disagreeing
with a hadîth to al-Imâm ash-Shâfi’î. ’Izz ad-dîn ibn ’Abd
as-Salâm, well-known as Sultan al-’ulamâ’, said, ‘It is so
astonishing for a faqîh to persist in following his own
madhhab instead of another madhhab whose leader
obviously hit the right point [in his ijtihâd], though he has
realized that his madhhab is weak. He supposes that reality,
hittingness, is in his own imâm only. Such people have been
blindfolded with the taqlîd so much that they are in this
state now. There is no similarity between these and the
Salaf.’ ”
And he says through the preacher’s mouth:
“This great scholar’s words are reasonable. But most
fuqâhâ’ were fixed on their madhhabs. These fellows
preferred being a Hanafî or Shâfi’î to being a
– 68 –

---

Muhammadî.”
The religion reformer himself affirms his own statement.
Certainly, so should be the freemasonic tactics! How have the
freemasons spread all over the world? Haven’t they achieved it
because of this mendacious, deceitful policy of theirs? But they
cannot deceive Muslims who have read the books of ’ilm al-hâl.
The scholars of Ahl as-Sunna wrote necessary answers to their
tricky writings and despised them all. One of these valuable books
is Hadrat Yûsuf an-Nabhânî’s