الحمد لله رب العالمين، وصلى الله وسلم وبارك على نبينا محمد
وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين و بعد
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
Clarifying Meanings
Madkhali, has two predominant meanings having very little relevance to the topic Im about to embark upon, but I feel must be simplified here. Madkhali on the one hand are viewed by blind followers of Shaykh Rab'ee al-Madkhali who have a end all and be all hujjah of everything pertaining to "manhaj", 98 percent of which have no clue of what manhaj is or what they mean by it. On the opposite end, you have people who likewise fall on the opposite extreme falling into fanaticism based on the fanaticism of the former. This group, generally view anything identified as "salafi" as inexorably "madkhali". These are the two predominant views about nonsensical inter-hizbi polemics of absolute no use to 90 percent of the masses of the Muslim world.
Hence this small tract is geared towards the basic studious Muslim and on up.
The meaning I myself am employing for "madkhali" is the general outlook of the blind followers of Shaykh Rab'ee, and most of those who fall generally under the salafi platform who may not identify with the madkhali approach, but fall under being the followers of Shaykh al-Albaani. While people on the anti-madkhali propaganda generally vilify all and sundry as being madkhali, including al-Albaani and his followers, There are major differences between the general followers of al-Albaani and the ghulaat who typically follower Shaykh Rab'ee. However, in terms of fiqh, there are similar patterns between the two groups.
Why I haven't labeled this "salafi fiqh". The problem that some students embark upon when identifying the blunders of this fiqh as "salafi" is that
a. in reality, there is no salafi fiqh
b. people who are actually salafi haqeeqatan, are actually either hanbali, shafi'ee, maaliki, hanafi, or dhaahiri
c. Some students who've labelled it "salafi fiqh" included within this the dhaahiri aspects of the ahlul-hadeeth movement. I personally identify the ahlul-hadeeth approaches to fiqh as closer to dhaahiri madhaab.
As for the name Madkhalism in and of itself, I still affirm the basic synopsis of what I said years ago, that being that the term is basically the stroke between those who've invented an imaginary madhaab that none of the scholars of Islam have identified on the one hand, and then the actual extremely ignorant extremist who follow Rabee al-Madkhali so blindly, that not even sufi muqallids reach the levels of rabid blind following as these individuals do, hence validating the label of madkhali and madkhalism in general. Bu because its use and misuse by the anti-madkhali movement has flooded the intellectual markets in forums and discussion, it has even been adopted by modernists, munafiqeen, and kuffar, and other academics in general as well as standard Muslim orthodox organizations like the Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought centered in Amman Jordan. See here
So now, we have officially [I guess] entered an era of realization of the reality and existence of madkhalism into the international arena describing a type of "salafism".
Fiqh
After having witness the blunders of madkhali fiqh, that being the approach to fiqh issues, I have been arrived at the opinion couple years back, that anyone who wants to be a student of knowledge or even to approach knowledge has to learn the basic fiqh of a given madhaab of choice.
There are two main reasons to why this is so.
Firstly, Distribution of Fatwa From Hadeeth Directly
The atmosphere of "extracting rulings" that madkhalis are guilty of by simply reading a hadeeth. In short, giving a fatwa directly from a hadeeth.
This is the pinnacle aspect of the blunders of madkhali fiqh because the issues involved in the extraction of hadeeth range to almost a dozen issues, all of them ijtihaadi
1. the conglomeration of ahadeeth on a given subject.
What do I mean here? it is a common practice of people infected with madkhali fiqh to open up a copy of Bukhari or Muslim, search the directory for the topic they need a solution in, and then look at some hadeeth in that section of the book, and then see which hadeeth accords to the exact issue they're trying to find an answer to, and then "roll with it" as we say here in America.
Firstly, one of the requisites of extraction a ruling from a hadeeth is to compile ALLL of the ahadeeth of that particular subject. So if its about the type of zakah given, then all of the 2 or 3 hundred ahadeeth have to be compiled.
Since this requisite can only be accomplished by the muhadith or a faqih who has the material, this pretty much exterminates madkhali fiqh in action.
2. Analyzation
After having conglomerated all of the ahadeeth that is needed to have the "overarching overview" of the subject. NOW COMES the tools of ijtihaad
The person reviewing these ahadeeth needs to have already been disciplined into knowing
a. which proofs were abrogating or abrogated. Hence an infected madkhali fiqh person would have no idea that the hadeeth he is reading aaas actually abrogated, and reading the saheeh collections DO NOT OUTLINE such information in such printed editions.
b. which ahadeeth imply a general inference, and which ones delineate into a specific tangent. (Khassa wa amm).
Performing this task requires solidified knowledge of the arabic language.
c. knowing what is the implied on absolute terms in the ahadeeth and knowing what is being restricted in such ahadeeth (mutlaq wa muqayyad)
d. having knowledge as to the reasons that a particular hadeeth was revealed (asbab)
Adding to all of this, weighing the wordings of the ahadeeth to the Qur'anic views on the topic. Hence this requires knowing ilm tafseer.
It also requires knowing extensive history of the era as it is essentially to contextualizing hadeeth literature.
All of these tools pertaining to hadeeth extraction are bereft of any madkhali fiqh.
Secondly, The application of Fataawa
This is the next big corruption of fiqh I've noticed about all of Madkhali fiqh, and it is more inclusive to most of the salafi community. So this includes islamqa websites of Shaykh Salih al-Munajjid, and others. This as well includes the entire anti-madkhali movement as well since most of them operate their fiqh perspectives from such ahkaam based avenues for their everyday fiqh.
Why? The framework of fataawa is based on the data and data processing of the mufti (the one authorized to give a fatwa), and more importantly, the presentation of that data by the mustafti (the one seeking the ruling i.e. the lay person, or someone who does not know)
Hence, the qaa'ida here is that the mufti gives a fatwa to the mustafti BASED UPON THE CONDITIONS OF THE MUSTAFTI. In other words, the ruling given is affected by the condition of the individual (mustafti). That is why one act can be halal for a person by which that very same act can be haraam for another person.
This reality identifies the heresy of utilizing fataawa gained from a website and utilizing it as your own code as an application of your fiqh in your life.
Secondly, THEE primary objective of fataawaa has nothing to do with the laity. The books of ahkaam, according to what I've learned from my ustaadh, is that the books of ahkaam are used BY STUDENTS OF KNOWLEDGE ALREADY TRAINED IN THE ART OF IJTIHAAD AND USOOLUL-FIQH. What was the purpose? These students are tested by the alim to review the fataawa of a book. Its interesting to know what was the purpose of fatwa books in the first place. I was told that the students read the fatawaa IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND HOW that particular mujtahid arrived at his ruling, AND TO SEE HOW THE MUJTAHID APPLIED THE RULES THEY HAVE JUST LEARNED BY THE SHAYKH, IN ACTION.
So fatwa books or databanks, websites, etc, having nothing to do with lay people searching a topic, reviewing the answer of the mujtahid, and then applying it upon themselves. It serves some good as mere cognizance of issues, and some rulings COULD apply, but the majority of rulings given to people are SPECIFIC TO THAT INDIVIDUAL ALONE. In other words, the same shaykh that made something halal on the person your reading the fatwa about can make that same issue haraam upon you BASED ON YOUR CIRCUMSTANCE.
So in my view, seeking the fiqh of what to do from fatwa databases is the typical erroneous feature brought to us by madkhali fiqh.
3. The next problem of madkhali fiqh is the fact that the exportation of fiqh to madkhali circles have been pigeon-holed to "aspects" of hanbali positions or other predominant positions. In other words, its a shake n bake DIY framework of assessing what rulings the individual finds to his or her advantage. However, the primary force of this approach is mainly based on the fiqh al-muqarran movement championed by Sayyid Saabiq rahimahullah, and other shaykhs followed suit in this endeavor. It does have its advantages and I've highlighted them elsewhere in the fiqh section of this forum, but should not replace the traditional forms of acquiring how the Muslims have originally gained knowledge of the basics of the shariah in their lives AS STUDENTS OF KNOWLEDGE. For the laity, they simply ask those who knew and who they del comfortable, qualified, and feel have a genuineness in their approach. As for students, learning through the frameworks of a madhaab is much more uniform in terms of coming out with a clearer vision and knowing how to approach and understand variances in opinions.
And this is primarily the problem of madkhali fiqh on this particular aspect, the inconsiderate and often times intolerant nature of madkhali fiqh approaches where stances differing from their own is note viewed as
a. inter-ijtihaadi outlooks to understanding the nusoos (texts)
but is rather seen as a
b. sunnah vs bid'a issue
whereby views not in coordination of their own madkahli views are understood specifically as corruptions and bid'a for which are invalid. This is the most abrasive aspect of madkhali fiqh which is their universal application of sunnah or bid'a on virtually every fiqh subject known to us.
4. the next problem of madkhali fiqh, and is more problematic than the previous, is the typical massive divergence between statements (fatawaa, sayings, etc) and the context that brought about such statements.
This typical lack of contextualization is predominately the character trait of the khariji type of madkhali muqallids, particularly the manhaj cops trying to implement what they perceive to be al-Jarh wa T'adeel.And yes, this lack of contextualization does seep into the realm of fiqh. In fact it doesn't just seep in, it has poured into it.
A common fiqh example of this lack of contextualization are for example, the following three issues
a. saying Jumu'ah Mubarak
b. shaking the hands after the salah
c. raising your hands in du'a after the salah
Typical madkhali fiqh protagonists on these subjects would basically read what Shaykh Fawzaan or what other 3 or 4 scholars said on the topic, and then classify it as an end all and be all of the entire issue and have declared its application as outright bid'a full stop.
Such madkhalis will not even ascertain the context of what these scholars have said these statements in. They won't even try to figure out that these same scholars did NOT regard performing these acts in and of itself as bid'a. They won't even bother to ascertain that the essence of what these scholars identified as bid'a, was the issue of applying these actions as permanently fixated actions at a specific fixated time. When voluntary actions of worship are done nonchalantly, they are not only permissible and acceptable, they are generally regarded as mustahab. Its when nonchalant actions of worship are then specified into times and forms in which the infringements to the realm of bid'a come in, and it is from this angle of approach that those shiyookh have spoken about these issues.
5. The last aspect is the awkwardness of madkhali fiqh by which the followers of Madkhali and this fiqh even differ from the scholars they claim to follow, primarily the contradictory reality that they themselves don't aspire to follow a madhaab in fiqh, but the scholars who they claim to identify with, predominantly see themselves as followers of the hanbali madhaab.
From Shaykh Fawzaan to Bin Baz, or from Ibn Uthaymeen to Shaaykh Saalih aali Shaykh, and mostly everyone in between, are hanbalis. Especially Ibn Uthaymeen, despite his alienation of Buhooti influences into the madhaab, ibn Uthaymeen or Bakr Abu Zayd have become known in recorded history of Islam as established fuqaha in the madhaab.
Such madkhalis retained their Jordanian influence from the influence of Shaykh al-Albaani and his students of having no madhaab, abandoned them for absolute hizbi corruptive reasons, and followed the saudi ulema retaining their la madhaabi traits.
Conclusion
it is people's own prerogative to approach fiqh as they see fit if they decide to approach it untraditionally. But this would mean that tolerance is only limited to them being absolutely silent and cut off from trying to entertain a discussion of fiqh, much less telling people something is bid'a or haraam. For once you open your mouth, you must suffer the ire of the qualified to see if you actually do qualify to even speak on the topic.
If however you aspire or proclaim "Talibul-Ilmness", this then requires that you at least learn basic uniform fiqh that is based on the madhaahib, either from a shaykh or reviewing a work with a teacher competent in the field.
It is one thing to proclaim to people "such and such is haraam, such and such is bid'a", and it is an entirely different matter altogether that if you are approached, and then you identify that "well from my own opinion and understanding, such and such is "this" and then explains why" since this is more subtle and you are not being confrontational or polemical about it. But to have this bid'a/sunnah perception of the entire realm of fiqh is one of the major problems of todays world brought upon by Madkhali fiqh.
I myself, have been victimized by Madkhali Fiqh as well, destroying the integrity of other aspects of the shariah that I myself ignorantly claimed to be bid'a, not realizing that there is a whole host of LEGAL and VALID frameworks and deductions brought about by MASSIVE amounts of scholars opposing my once upon a time held views. I remember being affected by this fiqh years ago and first waking up and emerging myself out of madkhalism, yet still scarred by its affects, remember declaring to a close brother of mine about the issue of more than 8 rakat in Tarawih "all other views not in accord to the 8 rakat are bid'a". I was then corrected by this brother, who also opined to the 8 rakat opinion, that this was belligerent of me and I have no basis to identify this subject in this fashion. After review upon review, I understood through time, why this was so.
Wa Billaahi Tawfiq
asalamu alaykum warahmatullah
__________________
ابو نعيمة علي البريكي
Comments