“Akhi… You Can’t Be Salafi & Shafi’i…That’s Bid’ah”

You Better Learn How to Roar

There is a famous fable that has been told in various cultures about a donkey posing as a lion.

One day, a donkey found a lion’s skin that hunters had left behind. Wanting to be feared and respected like the king of the jungle, the donkey put on the lion’s skin, covering himself from head to hoof.

As the donkey walked through the forest, all the animals he encountered were terrified, believing him to be a real lion. They fled in fear, and the donkey felt proud of his newfound power and influence.

However, the donkey became overconfident and attempted to roar like a lion, but instead of letting out a mighty roar, he brayed loudly in his own unmistakable donkey voice.

The other animals quickly realised it was not a lion at all, but a mere donkey in disguise. The animals returned and laughed at the donkey, saying, “If you want to pretend to be a lion, you’d better learn how to roar!”

Some of our brothers in Islam are just like this donkey wearing a lion’s skin.

They disguise themselves with a beard, a nice robe, and some Arabic words; and all of a sudden, they are scholars.

Just as all the animals in the forest were fooled into thinking the donkey was a real lion, the YouTube generation is fooled into thinking these brothers are people of knowledge.

The donkey’s bray made it clear it was not a lion, these brothers’ rudimentary understanding when it comes to the Islamic intellectual disciplines makes it clear that they are not real scholars.

A Salafi Wearing a Shafi’i Robe

A few years ago, I came across a Salafi teaching Shafi’i fiqh on YouTube.

He is an example of a new breed of Salafis who say they are Shafi’i in jurisprudence but Salafi in creed. This is an innovation if I have ever seen one!

As he was going through the text, he was teaching in accordance with the Shafi’i school. But now and again, he would stop on a particular issue and say, “But here we have to follow the evidence.”

He was implying that, in this issue, the Shafi’i school had reached the incorrect conclusion and should not be followed.

In his estimation, the entire Shafi’i school, which includes hundreds of thousands of jurists, had either misunderstood the piece of evidence relating to this issue or simply ignored it.

The idea that this evidence had somehow escaped the Shafi’i school is absurd. In every generation, up until this day, you have masters of sacred law upgrading the works of the previous generations.

If this one brother came across a particular piece of evidence, rest assured, the great Shafi’i scholars over the past 1,200 years had already come across it.

On a side note, if any of the four schools of jurisprudence reach a conclusion that seems to contradict a hadith or another piece of evidence, there is a valid reason why that conclusion has been reached.

It is not for a layman who knows nothing about jurisprudence to attempt to critique masters of sacred law who are experts in their field.

Salafis are Going Toe-to-Toe with Iron Mike

Many people are passionate about sports, but only the best — the experts — play at the highest level.

Jurists are experts in Islamic law, “playing at the highest level.”

Can a layman who read a single hadith suddenly “play” at that level with them?

Jurists go through years of intense, rigorous training, just like professional athletes. In fact, scholars’ training is far more rigorous than that of athletes, just in the intellectual realm, not the physical.

Many football supporters with their beer bellies shout, curse, and critique Steven Gerrard and Harry Kane. But put them on the pitch, and they would not even come close to matching their expertise.

Would an MMA fanatic jump into the ring with Khabib? A boxing fanatic with AJ? I think not. So, a layman should not jump into the scholastic arena with masters of jurisprudence.

The worst thing that could happen if you made a mistake when you were toe-to-toe with Iron Mike is getting knocked out. But if you make a mistake in the scholastic arena and start giving legal opinions without the requisite knowledge, you could not only send yourself to the fire but also others.

Let us go back to the Salafi in a Shafi’i robe; he was clearly one of those who would consider jumping into the ring with 6ft 9 Tyson Fury.

Whenever he came across a Shafi’i opinion he disagreed with, he would quote a hadith or another piece of evidence he stumbled across, derive a new ruling, dismiss the Shafi’i opinion, and then carry on with his class.

He was calling his students to follow his conclusion and not the conclusion reached by the entire Shafi’i school.

You have to give it to the brother, masha’Allah; the conclusion he arrived at after two minutes of putting his brain to work was more accurate than the conclusions reached by the hundreds of thousands of Shafi’i jurists over the past 1,200 years.

This brother is so brilliant that he can critique the entire Shafi’i school, which includes senior jurists like Imam a-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar, and Imam al-Ramli.

According to this brother, all of these Imams in all of their authoritative written works had either misunderstood the piece of evidence he found or outright ignored it.

Masha’Allah, this brother can barely speak Arabic, yet he can arrive at more accurate conclusions than Imam al-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar, Imam al-Ramli, and by extension, the entire Shafi’i school.

The audacity of this brother and those like him is untenable!

They cherry-pick a hadith, then critique great Imams like Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi’i, Ahmad, hundreds of thousands of their followers, and the innumerable books authored in their respective schools.

Did it not occur to him that they had seen this piece of evidence, but in spite of it, they had reached a different conclusion?

Everything is Bid’ah (an innovation)

A few months after I became Muslim, I was sitting in the mosque reading a book on the importance of following one of the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence (madhab).

The brother who had prayed next to me (one of those who think it’s sunnah to tickle your toes when standing next to you in prayer) was sitting to my right, and I could see him trying to sneak a peek at what I was reading.

Shortly after that, he politely asked me what the book was about. I was still a new Muslim and quite shy, so I thought it was just easier to let him see for himself instead of explaining what it was about.

I handed him the book, and he started skimming the pages. He could clearly see it was encouraging Muslims to follow one of the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence.

He then said to me in a caring but firm tone, “This is all bid’ah (innovation), everything new is bid’ah — Shafi’i, Sufi, Hanafi — this is all bid’ah. We are Muslims, and you are a new Muslim, so you have to be careful not to get misguided by these sects.”

When he said, “Everything new is bid’ah,” I was tempted to ask him, “Are you also a bid’ah? Because you weren’t around in the time of the companions.”

But on reflection, it’s best I didn’t. My comedy timing isn’t great, and I’m sure he would have taken it the wrong way. But if I had asked him that, I’m sure I would have had an even more interesting story to tell.

You can guess what happened next… drum roll, please.

A few days later, he gifted me the book The Prophet’s Prayer authored by Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani.

The Salafi brothers are under the erroneous assumption that The Prophet’s Prayer is the only book written in the last 1,400 years that accurately documents how the Prophet prayed.

They are clearly unaware that the four schools of jurisprudence have written an innumerable number of books that document how the Prophet prayed.

Salafis Making Progress: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

This brother has come a long way since then. After I had been away studying in Yemen for some time, I came back to London, and he overheard me in the mosque citing an opinion of Imam al-Shafi’i.

When he heard this, he said, “Masha’Allah, Imam al-Shafi’i, may Allah bless and have mercy on him.” I could tell by the tone of his voice that he was saying this with some reverence.

He had obviously come to the conclusion that the four schools of jurisprudence were no longer innovations.

I said he has come a long way, but he still tickles my toes when I stand next to him in prayer. Not only that, he recently declared his local Imam a disbeliever, refuses to pray behind him, and has now been banned from the mosque. So, it’s more like one step forward, two steps back.

Salafis are Everywhere

When I was in Yemen, there were Salafis who, 30 to 40 years ago, spoke very disparagingly of the Shafi’i scholars in the region. They didn’t see eye to eye with them on a number of issues.

But thirty years on, some of those Salafis are now studying jurisprudence with the Shafi’i scholars. They are still Salafis and disagree with the Shafi’i scholars on a number of matters, but at least they now recognise the importance of studying jurisprudence.

Fascinating, isn’t it? They disagree with them on pretty much everything, backbite them, and think they are innovators, but then they go and study jurisprudence with them…

Think about it: those Salafis are learning how to worship Allah from people whom they consider to be innovators.

Amazing…

Salafis Accept the Four Schools of Jurisprudence but Reject the Two Schools of Creed

Most Salafis now recognise the four schools as authorities in jurisprudence. But even with that, they take knowledge from them with a twist, like the brother we mentioned earlier, the Salafi in a Shafi’i robe.

If they see a hadith that seems to contradict a conclusion reached by a certain school, they will disregard 1,200 years of scholarship and follow their uneducated conclusion.

So, they have come far enough to afford some respect for the four schools of jurisprudence, but they still reject the two Sunni schools of creed.

Some Salafis say they follow the creed of Imam Ahmad, others claim they follow the Athari creed, and the really simplistic ones will say, “I follow the Qur’an and Sunnah.”

The Salafis are under the erroneous assumption that the Ash’ari and Maturidi schools are misguided innovators.

Although they will vehemently deny it, the overwhelming majority of scholars across the entire Muslim world over the past 1,200 years followed either the Ash’ari school of creed, founded by Shaykh Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari, or the Maturidi school of creed, founded by Shaykh Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.

The differences between these two schools are minimal. The third sound school of Sunni creed, and by far the smallest in terms of its number of followers, is the Athari school.

The Shafi’is and Malikis traditionally followed the school of Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari, the Hanafis followed the school of Abu Mansur al-Maturidi, and the Hanbalis followed the Athari school.

Where is Your Proof the Overwhelming Majority of the Scholars were Either Ash’ari or Maturidi?

The proof, my dear brother, is in the pudding.

Al-Hafidh al-Zabidi, the great 13th-century Hanafi scholar, mentions in his book Ithaf Sadah al-Muttaqin that the term Ahl al-Sunnah wa Jama’ah refers to the Ash’ari and Maturidis.

In this same book, Imam al-Kalasti, a distinguished Hanafi scholar of the 10th century, is cited, defining Ahl al-Sunnah wa Jama’ah as being the Ash’aris and Maturidis.

In this same work, Izz ibn Abd al-Salam, the renowned Shafi’i scholar, is cited, stating that there is a consensus amongst the Shafi’is, Malikis, Hanafis, and distinguished Hanbalis on the soundness of the creed of the Ash’aris.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Safarini, the esteemed 12th-century Hanbali scholar, in his book Ithar al-Haq, states that Ahl al-Sunnah wa Jama’ah consists of three schools: Ash’ari, Maturidi, and Athari.

It is mentioned in the book Mir’at al-Jinan wa Ibrat al-Yaqdhan by Imam al-Yafi’i, the 7th-century Shafi’i scholar and historian, that al-Hafidh Ibn al-Asakir, the Muhaddith and historian, cited the great Shafi’i Imam, Shaykh Abu Ishaq, as saying that the Ash’aris are the very essence of Ahl al-Sunnah.

The great Shafi’i Imam, al-Hafidh al-Subki, mentions that the creed of the Shafi’is, Hanafis, Malikis, and distinguished Hanbalis is the creed of Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari.

There are more references like these, but in the interest of not boring the reader, I will stop here.

Anyone Who Opposes Ash’aris and Maturidis is an Innovator

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, the 10th-century jurist, is an authority in the Shafi’i school. To deny that is akin to denying the brilliance of Pelé just because he played before one’s lifetime.

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami authored a supercommentary, Tuhfah al-Muhtaj, on the Minhaj of Imam al-Nawawi. Nawawi’s Minhaj is the last book of fiqh students go through in their formal studies.

Ibn Hajar’s supercommentary is one of the greatest and most advanced works ever authored in the Shafi’i school. To this day, it is a point of reference for Shafi’i scholars across the Muslim world.

If anyone is sceptical about it, go speak to the scholars in regions of the Muslim world that have been following the Shafi’i school for centuries: Yemen, Syria, Egypt, East Africa, Indonesia (and others); see what their scholars say about Ibn Hajar’s supercommentary; their praise of it will be unsparing.

You can pretend Pelé didn’t score many goals, but it doesn’t change the reality that he did!

Ibn Hajar al-Haytami is a senior authority in the Shafi’i school; denying that is denying reality itself. To attempt to turn a blind eye to his brilliance and disregard his knowledge and standing in the Shafi’i school is insanity!

In his book al-Ta’ruf fi al-Aslain wa al-Tasawwuf, Ibn Hajar al-Haytami explicitly says: “Anyone who opposes the creed of Ash’aris and Maturidis, is an innovator.”

The Salafis oppose the creed of both the Ash’aris and Maturidis, so in Ibn Hajar informed, educated and measured opinion, the Salafis are innovators.

Ibn Hajar also says in his book al-Zawajir fi al-Iqtiraf al-Kaba’ir:

“And by ‘Sunnah’ is meant what is upheld by the two Imams of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah: Sheikh Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari and Shaykh Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. As for ‘Bid’ah’ (innovation), it refers to what is adhered to by any sect among the deviant groups that oppose the creed of these two Imams and all their followers.”

Seems pretty clear-cut to me. The people of innovation are those who oppose the creed of Ash’aris and Maturidis or any of their followers.

In both passages, Ibn Hajar’s language is very specific here. He uses the term “oppose the creed.” He is not implying that there can’t be another school of creed; he is saying that if there is, then it cannot oppose the beliefs of the Ash’aris or Maturidis.

This is important because the Athari school is the third sound school of Sunni creed.

Ibn Hajar and Imam al-Nawawi on the Ash’aris

Salafis love Imam al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.

These two great Shafi’i Imams were both polymaths, having mastered numerous Islamic intellectual disciplines.

The works of these two eminent imams are filled with three things when referring to the Ash’aris: praise of them, defence of their positions, and agreement with them in the conclusions they reached.

Salafis are Trying to do a Clark Kent

Clark Kent jumps into the phone box with no powers, hoping to come out as a superhero.

Salafis jump headfirst into a single hadith with no knowledge, thinking it will make them scholars.

Clark Kent fulfils his mission. He steps out of that phone box superhuman, ready to save lives.

The Salafis fail theirs. They step away from that hadith more ignorant than when they first read it.

Unlike Clark Kent, who saves lives, Salafis destroy them.