A Call for Coexistence

Episode 20 

In the name of Allah[1], the All–Merciful, the Ever-Merciful. Peace and blessing of Allah be upon Muhammad (SAWS)[2]

In today’s episode, we will continue with Imam[3] Ahmad Ibn-Hanbal’s Islamic juristic school of thought. This juristic school of thought is considered the prevailing school in Saudi Arabia. Our host today is Dr. Saad Bin-Matar al-Ateiby, a professor at the Department of Juristic Politics in the High Institute of Judges. Dr. Saad also teaches at the University of Muhammad Bin-Saud in Riyadh.  His writings are available on this website: http://www.muslim.net.

The Core of  the four Jurisitc  Schools of thought

At the beginning of his lecture, Dr. al-Ateiby assured that all Juristic schools of thought are only juridical; for issues relating to the Islamic creed are indeed agreed upon by all schools. Prayers, for instance, are obligatory in all juristic schools.  In fact, those schools have focused on jurisdiction theories and the issues related to them.

Dr. al-Ateiby added that all Muslim States, throughout Islamic History, used to adopt a particular juristic school on the basis of the trust they had in a particular Imam.  Throughout history, the Hanafi school has been the most widely spread school. The Maliki school as well, was spreading in Andalusia and in today’s Morocco and Tunisia. Although no particular country has adopted the Hanbali school of thought, the doctrines of the Hanbali School were adopted in the Saudi Kingdom and that is how it gained its position in the region.  The school certainly spread afterwards, as the Saudi kingdom at the time extended to reach Basra.

In modern times, juristic and Islamic institutions in Saudi Arabia encourage collecting, writing and publishing old and new books about the Hanbali school of thought and encouraged their spread. And although the Hanbali juristic school has become a widely-spread school, other schools still exist such as the Hanafi School in some regions of the Hijaz.

No Rejection to a Particular Juristic School

While Mr. Amr wondered whether those juristic schools are accepted or rejected by Saudi Arabia’s renowned scholars and jurists. Dr. Saad stressed the point that adopting a particular juristic school of thought does not mean defending it fanatically, for the doctrines of the four imams are indeed against fanaticism.  The whole issue is that when a juristic school is adopted somewhere, it becomes the basis of Fatwas[4] in that place.

Dr. al-Ateiby also explained that although judges, at the beginning of the third Saudi State, were bound to refer only to Hanbali books, nowadays, they have the possibility to refer to the books of other juristic schools, which proves that other schools are not rejected. Issue which have been modified are only those with references which included juristic and creed-related mistakes.

The Islamic jurisprudence before Imam Ahmad Ibn-Hanbal

Regarding the status of Islamic jurisprudence during the era precededing Imam Ahmad Ibn-Hanbal, Dr. al-Ateiby denoted that jurists during that era could be described as what we call today law interpreters.  This was their only role; they did not come with any jurisdiction other than the one sent by Allah (SWT)[5].  On the contrary, they used to fight any other interpretations that go astray from Allah’s jurisdiction

The Greatness of Islamic jurisprudence

It is important to shed some light on the false yet frequent allegations that Islamic jurisprudence is the cause of all the stagnation of the Muslims and that Hanbali thoughts which are spread in Saudi Arabia are probably the main reason behind the hardships currently facing Muslims. 

Dr. al-Ateiby stressed that the problem lies in Muslims who overlooked the teachings of their Islamic law. He added that if we looked at the opinion of Dr. Hopkins, Professor of Philosophy in Harvard University, we will realize the actual difficulty which hinders Muslim countries' development. According to Dr. Hopkins, the way for Muslim countries to develop is not by adopting new systems of thought which maintain that religion should not intervene with the individual’s daily life. The Islamic system actually had all necessary inner predispositions to develop, and it is indeed better than many similar systems in terms of readiness to develop. In fact, the reason is not due to the lack of the needed means for development, but rather in people’s lack of use of these means.

There is an even stronger view, pronounced in 1927 during a conference of jurists, by the Dean of the Faculty of Law of the Vienna at that time and who was also a Law professor that Islam could by no means be driven by emotions or courtesy.  He said that humanity should be proud by the fact that a man like Prophet Mohammad (SAWS)[6] is part of it.  Despite his illiteracy, more than ten centuries ago he succeeded in bringing a law system stating that we, the Europeans, would be very happy, if they succeed in creating a similar system within two thousand years.

Coexistence among Juristic Schools

As for the difference in practical aspects of life and how our Imams have set rules for everything, even the way we can disagree. Dr. al-Ateiby confirms that following a particular school is something very usual even in non-Muslim doctrines.  Following a particular school of thought was never a problem, for one is still required to analyse, study and follow facts and evidence from the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah (the Prophet’s tradition) of the Prophet (SAWS). Imam ash-Shafi’ey for example, in his book Al Ummah, cites the various opinions brought by Islam’s various schools.  This shows that he was not a scholar who expressed his own opinion and banned the opinions of others.  What he did, however, was teach us to look for evidence and truth regardless of in which school of thought we find it. Similarly, Sheikh Bin-Baz, when he used to make a Fatwa (a legal opinion concerning Islamic jurisprudence), he used to mention that there were opinions different from his.  At a certain time, the importance of this issue was not very clear.  But now with the spread of satellite channels, you are addressing people who do know the other opinions.  So you should show that you have indeed examined the other opinion, but that you prefer this one because you believe it is the closest to the right judgement.

In this episode, we hope to emphasize the need for coexistence among Islamic doctrines and how can we coexist with each other in our homes, schools and mosques. It is important to respect and encourage the difference in opinions among our scientists and preachers on satellites, pulpits in mosques and on the internet. This diversity of opinion is primarily concerned with practical, not fundamental issues. For example, there is no juristic difference in opinions about the month of Ramadan, fasting, Ummrah[7], or pilgrimage. The difference in opinions, however, lies in the various details of those matters. In such a case, if we seek a fatwa, we should try to ask the most pious jurist.

Dr. al-Ateiby asserts that Imam Ezz Ibn Abdul-Salam confirmed in one of his books that a scientist is forbidden from giving a judicial fatwa if he did not know all the circumstances related to the place, time or conditions of that given issue. Thus we can see that the four great Imams had different views according to their own circumstances, especially those of Imam Ahmad Ibn-Hanbal .

Dr. al-Ateiby adds that Imam Ahmad was born to a great family called Shaiban. Although his mother was an Islamic jurist, his father and grandfather were military leaders. Hence, it was very likely for Imam Ahmed to be promoted to the highest positions, yet he devoted himself to scientific and juridical revival and the study of Hanafi school[8] of thought. He had apprenticeship at the hands of Imam ash-Shafi’ey which gave him an independent vision.

How did Imam Ibn-Hanbal coexist with other schools?

Imam Ahmad was the only Imam who did not find faults in other schools. On the contrary, he learned from others and never talked angrily or attacked anybody except those who contradicted the Noble Qu'ran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAWS). Imam ash-Shafi’ey once said to Ibn-Hanabal to inform him if he verifies a hadith and that he will blindly adopt it, no matter where it came from (from Hijaz, Iraq, Levant or else where). This goes to show the extent of faith and confidence the great scholars had in one another.

Many people reported his great piety and how has was never seen except in mosques or visiting patients. He refused the many gifts offered to him by caliphs and rulers. Al-Hafiz az-Zahabiy, a well-known follower of ash-Shafi’ey, said that Imam Ahmad was the Mufti[9] of Iraq and the Sunnah scholar who had a sober mind and a sharp intellect which he has never seen the likes of before.

On whether people are becoming more inflexible in dealing with Islamic jurisprudence in the current era, Dr. al-Ateiby replied that those Islamic jurisprudence schools still exist in our era, and that we must take what is good for us without fanaticism for a doctrine or another.

I ask Allah to gather us with him in jannah (Paradise), to enable us to learn from him how to co-exist with each other, and to resolve our conflicts.

Allah (SWT) says what can be translated as, “And obey Allah and His Messenger, and do not contend together, (and) so you would be disheartened and your vigor goes away; and (endure) patiently; surely Allah is with the patient". (TMQ, 8: 46)[10]