Abu Hamid Ghazali, in his work, Mizanal Amal (The Scales of Action) commented on the place of madhhabs (of differing schools of Islamic thought) within the larger context of religious belief and knowledge. In it Ghazali outlines three levels of madhhab which, in a sense, parallel the three primary levels which the human soul (nafs) can traverse, as mentioned in the Qur’an. These are the soul that is commanded by acquired habits or worldly passions (nafs ammara - Qur’an 12:53) rather than by reflection and the use of aql (spiritual intellect), the soul that corrects its own wrongdoing through an active conscience (nafs lawwama - Qur’an 75:2), and the soul that is at peace with itself through nearness to God (nafs mutma’inna - Qur’an 89:27).
The three levels of adherence to a madhhab that Ghazali catalogs are:
1. Madhhab in the sense of Hanafi, Hanbali, Shafi, Malaki etc. Each had their doctrinal teachings and each proclaimed their orthodoxy. As Ghazali states, “…as for “madhhab” in the first sense, that is the way of one’s forefathers and ancestors, or the madhhab of one’s teacher or of the people of the land where one grows up. This differs according to towns and countries, and according to the teachers concerned. Thus someone who comes under the influence of …a Shafi’i or Hanafi has the passionate clinging to that madhhab implanted in his soul…. So people say that “His madhhab is…Shafi’i , or Hanafi - and the meaning of this is that he is passionately attached to it….The pupil is like paper that has been written on and which the ink has penetrated….For everything that is mentioned to him that is different from what he has heard (perhaps in his youth or from his teachers) does not persuade him. Indeed he tries vigorously not to be convinced….”(see footnote 1)
2. Madhhab as a deepening of one’s intellectual and spiritual understanding of religion. This is an inner movement allowing the emergence of and the eventual establishment of an active inner faith (iman) and spiritual intellect within one’s consciousness and heart. As Ghazali indicates, “…the second (meaning of) madhhab is what is appropriate in (spiritual) guidance and teaching, to whoever comes seeking to learn or to be guided. Now this cannot be specified in only one way, but rather it differs according to the pupil….”(see footnote 2)
3. Madhhab as the full flowering or unfolding of this faith within the heart. This is the experiential awareness of spiritual realities and a transformation of one’s inner world through nearness to God, and of one’s actions into those most reflective of an uplifted inner state. Ghazali writes, “The third (meaning of) madhhab is what a person experiences in his innermost self, between himself and God, such that no one other than God - may He be exalted! - is aware of it. He does not mention it except to someone who is like himself in his awareness of what he has become aware of, or else who has reached a stage where he is capable of becoming aware of it and understanding it….But this (requires) that the…inherited belief he grew up with (or which he acquired through teachers) and became attached to not be deeply rooted in his soul….”(see footnote 3)
The prophetic religious figures we revere recognized the sublime depths of the Reality which was unveiled for them. Their beliefs and actions flowed from something so profoundly deep that it could not be bound into a single, neatly packaged template or doctrine without discarding the rich vastness that underlies reality and which is evident in the layered richness of meaning and significance within revelation. They pointed to principles that were transcendentally alive within their hearts and they provided signs and indications of the unseen depths that are the supporting under-structure of our universe. They provided behavioral principles which, if followed, would elevate the character of both societies and individuals by bringing them into a state of balance that would benefit them both in this immediate world and in the world to come.
Categorization of religion into definitively organized and cataloged sets of beliefs occurs at a later stage. Each religion begins with a transcendental encounter, with an experience of higher realities, and with a revelation that awakens people to that higher reality and to what the true nature of reality demands from them. Then the followers begin to categorize and catalog and interpret (each group according to their own understanding, their own lens of perception), and in this way many schools of thought begin to spring from one source. They exert themselves to understand and explain the principles (both of belief and of action) that exist in the Qur’an (and the hadith). The schools differ because they cast their focus, their emphasis, on different areas of the source material and because each, according to its inclination, discovers different patterns and structures within this source material. Each group will claim to reflect accurately the true aim and intention of the source even as they unavoidably sift and select and interpret through their own mental sieve. This is not a criticism but a recognition of an innate human impulse to analyze, codify, interpret, and concretize knowledge into fixed templates.
It is like shining a light on the surface of the ocean to see into its depths. Instead the light illuminates in stark detail the surface of the water (and perhaps what is just fractionally below the surface) and all that floats and moves on this surface. The depths remain concealed, rendered invisible by the reflecting and scattering of light. Doctrinal approaches to religion can experience this same phenomenon. Historical events, personalities, tenets of the creed, rulings of law, and sharply defined boundaries of belief, emerge into stark prominence. These are all studied and elaborated upon in great detail. And though it is good and even essential to know all of this it cannot be said to represent a complete picture of that at which religion aims.
As different groups each shine their own light upon the surface, each characterizes that which has been illuminated by their specific beam as orthodoxy. Each organizes and catalogs, orders and delineates, and abstracts both dogma and doctrine from their understanding of what they have witnessed and understood. The limits of the field of view illuminated by their beam sets, for them, the prescribed limits of religious orthodoxy. Their interpretation of what they see, their hermeneutics, further distinguishes one group’s understanding from the others.
Sometimes they make their understanding of religious truth into the measure of truth itself. And they measure other groups according to this derived measure of truth, and label and categorize them according to the derived standard as if it was an infallible standard. Although a human understanding (other than a transcendental Prophetic understanding), no matter how learned cannot hold (sensibly) an absolutely infallible position. As Ghazali states, “….none of them has a miracle which would give his side precedence.”(see footnote 4)
All this recedes into the background when the surface of the water is breached and the vast depths of Reality’s ocean is sensed. Even studying only the surface astounds us - just as the manifold mysteries of the physical universe, which is the surface of reality, endlessly unfold before us and occupy our sciences. We shine the light of reason and observation on existence and reap instrumental knowledge and control. This is a heady and empowering experience - to gain a level of manipulative control over the material world through understanding the dynamics by which it operates. We learn how to move about more efficiently upon the surface (of physical existence) and manipulate for our benefit the properties of the physical world we study. The mastery of the ins and outs and numerous complexities and theological and legal details of a given religious orthodoxy creates a similar sense of empowerment.
But this is the study of surfaces - what underlies the surface is what spins the mind into bewilderment, awe, and inward transformation. Divine revelation represents a plunging into the depths and a return to the surface armed with the experiential certainty that the surface is only a skin and that what moves and shapes and sustains the skin (of physical existence) is of an unfathomable depth.
The differing orthodoxies of the various schools are then seen for what they are - localized illuminations, beams of light that reveal a useful and beneficial section of reality, not the whole, immeasurable infinitude of the ocean. They provide a template and a guideline which provides shape and form and boundaries so that one is not lost immediately in bewildering depths and diversity. But they can become limited absolutes - granting an absolutist prerogative to their one particular template. The greatness of God and the profundity of His revelation cannot be reduced so absolutely to the outlines deduced (however capably) by men. Each school has its characteristics, each has its methods, each struggles honestly to be true to its interpretation of the source material (the Qur’an and hadith), yet each is a school constructed and elaborated upon by human effort (with the limitations that implies even for the most capable of interpreters). They provide guidance, but they are not ultimate guidance (that is reserved for God and that which He gives to the Prophets through revelation - and to select individuals, in the measure He (God) desires to give, through inspiration and insight).
Those who have a madhhab in the third sense mentioned by Ghazali (”….the third (meaning of) madhhab is what a person experiences in his innermost self, between himself and God….”), follow an elevated madhhab that hints at the immense depths that lie beneath the surface. They recognize the monumental unbounded nature of reality. They recognize that what is deeper than the surface is what overwhelms and unifies the disparate points of view, and can reconcile the veneer of surface differences illuminated by separate beams of light, of separate schools and differing orthodoxies.
1. ” He who speaks does not know…”: Some Remarks by Ghazali, James W. Morris, Boston College, Studies in Mystical Literature, Vol. 5 (1985/appeared in 1987), pp. 1-20
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Ibid.
{ 3 } Comments
I have never thought of Madhabs as ultimately being interpretations of humans. I have, as have others, made the mistake of making a madhab into the deen itself.
Assalamualaikum
Excellent elaboration on Ghazali definition of madhabs, which clearly reitreate my conviction of the contingency of any Madhab in relation to the Ultimate Truth. No Madhab should claim an exclusivity to the gate of salvation of Man.
Thanks
Katib
I think it’s not in every one’s wisdon/intellect to understand each and every surah and hadith himself. If that was the case, then every man would have understood the God himself, no need for prophets to show the light/guidance. These great men have simplified for ordinary people how to lead their lives by thoroughly investigating Quran and Hadith, like today somebody can’t directly fly the plane without taking proper lessons. Just reading and believing that you can do is not enough. The valuable and right teachings derived from the Qur’an al-karim and hadith ash- Sharifs is only what the Ahl as-sunnat savants understood and explained. Every deviant, every man of bidat, and every ignorant person supposes and claims that the way he follows is compatible with the Qur’an al-karim and hadith ash-Sharifs. For this reason, not every meaning derived from the Qur’an and hadiths is to be accepted and esteemed.
All the rules of Islam are derived from the Qur’an. The Qur’an incorporates within itself all the rules contained in the books sent to all Prophets (salawatullahi ‘alaihim) and even more. Those with blind eyes, little knowledge and short brains cannot see this fact. These rules in the Qur’an are of three types.
Men of reason and knowledge can easily understand the first type of rules through a verse, through a signal, through denotation, through inclusion, through necessitation and through the conclusion of the Nass. That is, every ayat has various meanings and edicts with respect to its sentence, signal, denotation, inclusion, necessitation and conclusion [To understand this point more clearly an example must be given: An Ayat of the Qur’an declares, “Do not say, ‘Ugh!’ to your parents!” What this Ayat points out through these words is: 1- The verse: Do not use this word “ugh!” towards your parents. 2- Signal: Do not use the words hat will hurt your parents’ hearts. This is what this ayat points out through these words. 3- Denotation: Do not do anything that may hurt your parents’ hearts. 4- Inclusion: Do not beat or kill your parents. 5- Necessitation: Do favors for your parents. 6- Conclusion: Offending your parents causes disasters; pleasing parents causes happiness. Six types of meanings, as exemplified above, have been derived from each ayat that communicates rules.]. (Nass) means ayats and hadiths with clear and obvious meanings.
The second type of rules in the Qur’an cannot be understood clearly. They can be derived through ijtihad [Ability to understand the meaning of symbolic ayats in the Qur’an.] and istinbat [It means to extract the essence of something.].
In the ahkam-i ijtihadiyya (rules of the second type that can be understood through ijtihad), any one of the Ashab-i kiram might disagree with the Prophet. Yet these rules could not have been defective or doubtful during the time of our Prophet because if a wrong ijtihad was formulated, Hadrat Jabrail would descend and the wrong ijtihad would immediately be corrected by Allahu ta’ala. In this way, right and wrong were immediately differentiated from each other on the spot. However, rules that were derived after our Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) honored the next world were not so, and the correct and incorrect ijtihads remained mixed. It is for this reason that it is necessary both to do and to believe in the rules that were derived during the time of wahy [Allah’s commands that come to prophets directly or through an angel. The entire Qur’an is wahy that has come through the angel Jabrail.]. It is necessary to do the rules that were derived after our Prophet also. Yet it does not spoil one’s iman to doubt about an ijtihad on which there has been no ijma [Unanimity of the Ashab al-kiram on a religious matter that has not been explained clearly in the Qur’an or hadiths.].
The third group of rules in the Qur’an are so profound, so well hidden that human power falls short of understanding and deriving them. They cannot be comprehended unless they are explained by Allahu ta’ala. And this fact has been shown and explained only to our Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). It has not been explained to anybody else. These rules also are derived from the Qur’an, yet since they have been explained by the Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), they are called Sunnat. Concerning the rules of the first and third types, nobody can disagree with the Prophet. All Muslims have to believe and follow them. But on the ahkam-i ijtihadiyya, every mujtahid [He who understands the hidden, symbolic meanings in the Qur’an.] has to follow the rule that he has derived. He cannot follow the rules of other mujtahids. A mujtahid cannot say that another mujtahid has gone wrong, or that he has dissented from the righteous way on account of his ijtihad. For each mujtahid, his own ijtihad is correct and right. Our Prophet used to command his Sahabis whom he sent to distant places to act according to the rules of the Qur’an on matters they would be confronted with, but if unable to find them in the Qur’an, to look them up in hadiths, and if unable to find them there, to act according to their own opinions and ijtihads. He used to forbid them from following others’ opinions and ijtihads, even if they were more learned and greater than themselves. No mujtahid, none of the Ashab-i kiram (radi Allahu ta’ala anhum ajmain) has ever discounted as wrong another’s ijtihads. They have not uttered such evil terms as ’sinner’ or ‘aberrant’ to those who disagreed with them.
The greatest of the mujtahids succeeding the Ashab-i kiram (radi Allahu ta’ala anhum ajmain) is Imam-i azam Abu Hanifa (radi Allahu ‘anh). This great leader had wara’ and taqwa in his every action. In everything he did he followed our Prophet in the fullest sense of the word. He reached such a high grade in ijtihad and istinbat that no one else could be compared with him.
[There had been people before him who were more learned and greater than he. Yet during their lifetimes aberrations had not spread; therefore, they had not prepared gauges to differentiate what was correct from what was incorrect. Instead they had dealt with more valuable matters].
Hadrat Imam-i Shafi’i [The leader of the Shafi’i madhhab, which is one of the four righteous madhhabs in Islam.] said, “All mujtahids are Imam-i azam Abu Hanifa’s children.” He said this because he understood something of the genius of this great leader of ijtihad. Hadrat ‘Isa (Jesus), after descending from heaven in a time close to the end of the world, will act according to Hadrat Muhammad’s Shariat and will derive rules from the Qur’an. Hadrat Muhammad Parisa, one of the great Islamic savants, says, “All the rules which such a great Prophet as Hadrat ‘Isa will derive through ijtihad will be in agreement with the rules in the Hanafi madhhab; that is, they will conform with the great leader’s ijtihad.” This shows how accurate and how correct the great leader’s ijtihad is. The awliya [ Person or persons whom Allah loves.] said that they saw through the heart’s eye that the Hanafi madhhab was like an ocean, while the other madhhabs were like small rills and brooks. Hadrat Imam-i azam Abu Hanifa surpassed everybody also in following the sunnat in his ijtihad, and he took even Mursal [ Kinds of hadiths are explained in the second fascicle of Endless Bliss.] hadiths as well as Musnad [ Kinds of hadiths are explained in the second fascicle of Endless Bliss.] hadiths as documents. He also held the words of the Ashab-i kiram superior to his own opinions and findings. He understood better than anybody else the greatness of the grades which the Ashab-i kiram (radi Allahu ta’ala anhum ajmain) had attained by having the honor of being together with our Prophet (sall Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). No other mujtahid was able to do so. Those who say that Imam-i azam derived rules from his own mind, that he was not dependent upon the Qur’an and hadiths are disparaging millions of Muslims, who have been worshipping for centuries on the earth, with having been on a wrong and fabricated path and even with having been outside of Islam. Only block-headed and ignorant people who are unaware of their own ignorance or the enemies of Islam, who want to demolish, to spoil Islam, will say something of this sort. A few ignorant people, a few zindiqs, memorizing a few hadiths and presuming that Islam is no more than that, deny the rules of which they have not heard and of which they have no knowledge. Yes, an insect that has remained in the cavity of a rock will consider the earth and the sky as consisting of only that hole.
The chief of the Ahl as-sunnat and the founder of fiqh is Imam-i azam Abu Hanifa (rahmatullahu ta’ala ‘alaih). Three-fourths of the rules of Islam that are carried out all over the world belong to him. He also has a share in the remaining one-fourth. He is the host, the chief of the family in the Islamic Shariat. All the other mujtahids are his children.
[All the rules which a mujtahid has derived are called a Madhhab. Out of hundreds of Ahl as-sunnat madhhabs, today, only four Imams’ madhhabs have been transferred into books, and the others have been partly forgotten. The names and the dates of the deaths of the four Imams are: Abu Hanifa 150, Malik bin Anas Asbahi 179, Muhammad Shafi’i 274, and Ahmad bin Hanbel 241.
Non-mujtahids have to follow one of these four madhhabs in all their actions and worships. This means to say that our Prophet’s (sall Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) way is the way shown by the Qur’an, and the hadiths, in other words, by the sunnat and by the ijtihad of the mujtahids. Besides these three documents, there is Ijma’-i ummat, which is, as it is written under the subject of ‘Imprisonment’ in Ibni Abidin, the words of the Ashab-i kiram (rahmat Allahu ta’ala ‘alaihim ajmain) and those of the Tabiin [A person who saw the Prophet at least once when he was alive is called a Sahabi. It goes without saying that a disbeliever could not be a Sahabi or Ashab. Ashab means Muslims who saw the Prophet at least once. All of the Ashab are called Ashab al-kiram. When we say Ashab al-kiram, we mean all the Muslims who were with him, spoke to him, listened to him, or, at least, saw him. If a person did not see the Prophet, but if he saw one of the Ashab al-kiram, he is called a Tabi’. The plural form of Tabi’ is Tabiin. When we say the Tabiin, we mean all the Muslims each of whom saw one Sahabi at least once. A person who saw one of the Tabiin is called Taba’-i-Tabiin. When we say Salaf-i-salihin, we mean the Ashab al-kiram, the Tabiin and the Taba’-i-Tabiin. ]. That is, they are the things which none of them refuted or denied upon seeing them. The Shiites’ claim in the book Minhaj-us-salihin is not correct. They say it is not permissible to adapt ourselves to a dead person.]
Islamic religion has come to us through these four documents. These four documents are called “Adilla-i Shariyya.” Everything outside these are bidat, irreligiousness, and false. The inspirations and the kashfs that occur to the hearts of great men of tasawwuf [see articles 35 and 40, respectively] cannot be proofs or documents for the rules of the Shariat. [Kashf will be explained in the following pages.] Correctness of kashfs and inspirations is judged by their compatibility with the Shariat. An Awliya who is in high grade of the tariqat or wilayat has to follow a mujtahid, like Muslims in lower grades. The Awliya such as Bastami, Junaid, Jalaladdin-i Rumi and Muhyiddin-i Arabi were raised in rank by adapting themselves to a madhhab as everybody did. Sticking to the rules of the Shariat is like planting a tree. The knowledge, the marifat, the kashfs and tajallis, the divine love and muhabbat-i zatiyya [Love for only Allah without including His attributes. Divine love is love for Allah together with His attributes.] that occur to the Awliya are like the fruits of this tree. Yes, the purpose in planting the tree is to get the fruit. But, it is necessary to first plant the tree for obtaining the fruit. That is, unless there is iman and the rules of the Shariat are carried out, there can be no tasawwuf, tariqat or awliya. Those who claim so are zindiqs [A person who endeavors to defend and spread his own thoughts under the name of Islam, though they are, in fact, incompatible with Islam.] and irreligious. We should be aware of such people more than we would be of a lion. A lion will only take away our life. But such people will take away our faith and iman. [It is written in the book Maraj-ul-Bahrayn, which quotes Ahmad Zarruq as saying that Imam-i Malik (rahmat Allahu ta’ala ‘alaih) said: “Anybody who dives into tasawwuf without learning fiqh becomes a zindiq (renegade); and anybody who learns fiqh and yet is not aware of tasawwuf, goes astray; but those who obtain knowledge of both fiqh and tasawwuf attain the truth. Anybody who learns fiqh correctly and who tastes the sweetness of tasawwuf becomes a ‘perfect kamil’.” All the early men of tasawwuf were in the madhhab of a scholar of fiqh before they attained perfection. The statement, “People of tasawwuf don’t have a madhhab” does not mean that they left their madhhabs, but rather it means that they knew all the madhhabs and that they always took into consideration all of them. They performed their duties according to what was best and what was on the safe side. Junaid-i Baghdadi was in the madhhab of Sufyan-i Sawri; Abdul Qadir Geilani (Jilani) was a Hanbali; Abu Bakr Shibli was a Maliki; Imam-i Rabbani and Jariri were in the madhhab of Hanafi; Haris-i Muhasibi was a Shafi’i (Qaddas-Allahu ta’ala Asrarahum/may Allahu ta’ala make their secrets very sacred.)]
Post a Comment