Post by Zameel on Aug 22, 2017 8:32:17 GMT
‘Ulamā’ of Deoband Leave Tarjīḥ to the Ahl al-Tarjīḥ of the Past
“In short, this issue still requires more investigation. Nevertheless, our fatwā and practice will remain in accordance with the verdict of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah], may Allāh have mercy on him. This is because we are muqallids of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah], may Allāh have mercy on him. For a muqallid, the verdict of the imām is a proof, not the four evidences [of Sharī‘ah i.e. Qur’ān, Sunnah, Ijmā‘ and Qiyās], since adducing proof from them is the job of a mujtahid.” (Aḥsan al-Fatāwā, 2:152)
On a particular issue in which there are conflicting opinions in the Ḥanafī madhhab, Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī (1244 – 1323 H/1829 – 1905 CE) mentions the earlier Fuqahā’ differed over which opinion to give preference to. Then he states, “Since this worthless one is not from the Ahl al-Tarjīḥ, there should be no discussion [from myself] on the basis of tarjīḥ (giving preference to one opinion based on evidence).” (Bāqiyāt Fatāwā Rashīdiyya, p. 152)
The first head muftī of Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband, Muftī ‘Azīz al-Raḥmān al-‘Uthmānī (1275 – 1347 H/1859 – 1928 CE), explains: “It states in al-Durr al-Mukhtār: ‘As for us, we must follow what they have given tarjīḥ to and have considered authentic, just as if they were to give fatwā [to us] in their lifetimes.’ Thus, for us it is necessary to act upon the opinion which the murajjiḥīn and muḥaqqiqīn amongst the Fuqahā’ have stipulated as the rājiḥ and muftā bihī, whether it is [the opinion] of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah] Ṣāḥib or of Ṣāḥibayn. To give tarjīḥ to the opinion of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah] Ṣāḥib or Ṣāḥibayn is not our job.” (Fatāwā Dārul ‘Ulūm Deoband, Dārul Ishā‘at, 1:749)
One of the recent elders of Deoband, Muftī Rashīd Aḥmad al-Ludhyānwī (1341 – 1422 H/1922 – 2002 CE), a faqīh and muḥaddith (who taught Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī over 20 times), says regarding an issue in which the opinion of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (and the Ḥanafī madhhab) apparently seemed to go against a ḥadīth:
“In short, this issue still requires more investigation. Nevertheless, our fatwā and practice will remain in accordance with the verdict of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah], may Allāh have mercy on him. This is because we are muqallids of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah], may Allāh have mercy on him. For a muqallid, the verdict of the imām is a proof, not the four evidences [of Sharī‘ah i.e. Qur’ān, Sunnah, Ijmā‘ and Qiyās], since adducing proof from them is the job of a mujtahid.” (Aḥsan al-Fatāwā, 2:152)
The first head muftī of Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband, Muftī ‘Azīz al-Raḥmān al-‘Uthmānī (1275 – 1347 H/1859 – 1928 CE), explains: “It states in al-Durr al-Mukhtār: ‘As for us, we must follow what they have given tarjīḥ to and have considered authentic, just as if they were to give fatwā [to us] in their lifetimes.’ Thus, for us it is necessary to act upon the opinion which the murajjiḥīn and muḥaqqiqīn amongst the Fuqahā’ have stipulated as the rājiḥ and muftā bihī, whether it is [the opinion] of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah] Ṣāḥib or of Ṣāḥibayn. To give tarjīḥ to the opinion of Imām [Abū Ḥanīfah] Ṣāḥib or Ṣāḥibayn is not our job.” (Fatāwā Dārul ‘Ulūm Deoband, Dārul Ishā‘at, 1:749)