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

“Obey My
Messenger!” and “Adapt yourselves to My Messenger!” and
Rasûlullah’s (’alaihi ’s-salâm) command, 
“Hold fast to the way of
my compaions!” are the documents of our argument. If following
the a’immat al-madhâhib meant to abandon Allâhu ta’âlâ and His
Messenger (’alaihi ’s-salâm) and to become a slave of another
slave, following as-Sahâbât al-kirâm would have meant the same.
Since it was not so, Rasûlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) commanded it.
He commanded people to believe briefly and to perform ’ibâda as
much as they saw him do. He did not even suggest that they
should know the proofs.
[1]
Allâhu ta’âlâ disapproves of
disbelievers imitating their parents, and He commands them to
give up disbelief and to have belief. He does not disapprove of
imitating His Messenger (’alaihi ’s-salâm), but commands it. And
– 37 –
[1] Hadrat al-Imâm al-Ghazâlî explained this in detail in his work 
Kimyâ’
As-sa’âda.

---

Rasûlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm) commands us to imitate his
companions. It is bad to follow the wicked, but this should not
prevent us from following the good people. As explained above,
if it were easy to understand the documents of the part pertaining
to îmân, the Christian Arabs in Beirut would necessarily have
îmân easily. Since it was not easy to understand the documents of
the principles that are to be believed, we were ordered to have
îmân without the need to understand the documents, and those
who believed in this manner were called 
“Mu’minûn” (Believers,
Muslims). If Allâhu ta’âlâ had made Muslims liable also for
learning and understanding the documents of the rules concerning
’ibâdât, His Messenger (’alaihi ’s-salâm), too, would have
suggested it. Indeed, as explained above, he never did.
By saying that prophets (’alaihimu ’s-salâm) never erred but
mujtahids might have made mistakes, he supposes that the rules
revealed by mujtahids are different from those revealed by the
Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm). On the contrary, a mujtahid or an
imâm al-madhhab was a great ’âlim who spent his whole life
studying day and night, searching and finding out the rules that
had been conveyed by the Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm) and by as-
Sahâbat al-kirâm and who transmitted them to Muslims. No
mujtahid ever added anything to any kind of ’ibâdât. They said
unanimously that it was a bid’a and a great sin. There cannot be
another slander as ugly and loathsome as accusing the mujtahids
of something which they themselves prohibited. It is crass
ignorance and idiocy to say that mujtahids expanded the religion.
It is answerable in no way but with a a sneer. The religion does
not expand, but the number of cases increases. It is a great
service to Islam and a very valuable ’ibâda to apply Islam to
those cases which have appeared and developed during the
course of time. And this has been and is still being the lot of the
mujaddid imâms.
A mujaddid does not have to be a mujtahid mutlaq. It is true
that the four a’immat al-madhâhib prohibited taqlîd. But they
prohibited it for those scholars who were educated among their
disciples and who had reached the grade of ijtihâd. It is never
permissible for any mujtahid to follow another mujtahid. This rule
will be valid till Doomsday. But it does not apply to the
ignoramuses and religion reformers who think of themselves as
mujtahids. If a mouse thinks of itself as a lion and then meets a cat,
it will realize that it has been wrong. But its mistake will cost it its
life.
– 38 –

---

27– In the seventh dialogue the religion reformer says:
“Who demoted the religion into this state of theoretical
philosophy are the later Islamic scholars. They put some
definitions and limitations. They divided it into sections. In
fact, there were those who said that becoming a scholar of
fiqh required twenty years of study. However, it had taken
that much time to establish all the branches or the rules of
the religion. It had not taken even two years to establish the
fiqh. I want modern Muslims to be like the Muslims of the
time of the Four Caliphs. Therefore, it is the duty of every
Muslim to perform the ’ibâdât on which there has been
unanimity. It is not necessary to perform the controversial
ones even if they were said to be fard. On such matters, you
should act upon your studying its evidences or act in accord
with a narration (qawl), if you prefer this narration because
it suits your case. But you should not blame others for not
doing as you do. It is not proper to perform salât behind
different imâms belonging to different madhhabs in the
same mosque at the same time. In short, we should do what
as-Sahâba did, and we should not do what they did not do.
We should exercise an option in doing controversial
matters. We should employ qiyâs on what as-Sahâba did
not explain. On controversial matters everybody should act
in accordance with the hadîths which they believe to be
sahîh.”
He attacks Islamic scholars with the accusation that they
turned Islam into philosophy by dividing it and introduced
definitions and limitations into it. Yet the fact is that, the scholars
of kalâm had nothing to do with philosophy, for, they were much
higher than philosophers. However, during the time of the
Umayyads, Muslims who spread over the three continents met
various groups of non-Muslims, and also such groups as the
Khawârij and the Mu’tazila appeared, who tried to mislead the
new Muslims. The scholars of Ahl as-Sunna had to protect
Muslims’ faith and to answer various religions, philosophers and
zindîqs. Preparing answers refuting their philosophy as they
should deserve, they promulgated the knowledge of kalâm far and
wide, thus preventing the youth from being deceived. While it is
an obligation for us to praise them for their glorious and
honourable services and to thank them and invoke blessings on
them, does it become a Muslim to attempt to speak ill of them for
this reason? Because as-Sahâbat al-kirâm were very wise and
– 39 –

---

intelligent and had such a guide as Rasûlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm),
the Islamic religion was established in twenty years. After the
second century of Islam, the Muslims who had then spread over
the three continents did not have either of these advantages. The
time a disciple would need to learn from his master became
longer. Yet, it was said by the scholars that it was still possible to
learn in a short time if the master would be tender and skillful and
the disciple intelligent and diligent, and history books reveal that
there came those who could fulfil these conditions. In addition,
the darkness of bid’as and sins blackened the hearts and
weakened the memories and, consequently, caused the duration
of education to become longer. Even Hadrat al-Imâm ash-Shâfi’î
complained to his master Wakî’ about the weakness of his
memory. The answer he was given as stated in the following
distich reveals this fact: