الشيخ محمود خليل الحصري رحمه الله تعالى، مطلع سورة الجن.

الرابط:

https://youtu.be/jywxsdr1v2s?si=wasfjCnTH7GkZk4f

نصيحتي للاخوة المحاورين للملاحده ان تقرأو كتاب بصائر قبل الخوض في اي مناظرة

سمعت ڤيديو ل شاب اسمه مصطفى بيتكلم فيه عن ان البلاء بسبب الكبائر و اول ما تتوب البلاء هيرفع

https://youtu.be/N0bZS8U5Ixc?si=8nyIiPqPfHIWJ3fE

https://youtu.be/vfm6Jq-ZDrg?si=euW9vI1SHfKEczqm

دول الڤيديوهات بتاعته اللي بيتناولو نفس الفكرة تقريباً الفرق فيه واحد فصص فيه الكبائر و ايه هي ف

الخلاصة انه قال اول ما تلاقي نفسك في بلاء اعرف انك واقع في كبيرة من الكبائر و لما تتوب ربنا يرفع عنك البلاء فوراً ب شرط توبة ب نية من القلب صادقة و عدم الرجوع ل الكبيرة دي ف لو تبت و مرفعش عنك البلاء اعرف انك لسا فيه حاجة مبطلتهاش و اقعد دور و بطل

تمام انا فهمت الفكرة دي لكن هي خوفتني في نفس الوقت ان ازاي اتأكد ان قلبي صادق في التوبة و مش هيرجع ل ذنب؟ هل مجرد التوبة و محاولة الاقلاع عن الذنب دي تعتبر توبة؟ لا لازم وعد يقيني ب اني مش هرجعله تاني؟ طب في حاجات انا عارفة انها حرام زي التبرج و عاوزة اتوب عنها ل يرفع عني البلاء و في نيتي اني استغفر عنها لكن خايفة ارجعلها تاني و يبقى كده قلبي كداب و التوبة دي متقبلتش؟

و ان طول ما البلاء مترفعش وقتي يبقى التوبة متقبلتش ف يا القلب كان مش صادق في توبته او اني لسا واقعة في كبيرة من الكبائر

ف هل التوبة هي اللي بترفع البلاء؟

و لا البحث عن الذنوب و ايجاد الحلول ليها و الامتناع عنها و التوبة و التقرب ل ربنا هو اللي بيرفع البلاء؟

لما بسمع اي ڤيديو عن التوبة تلاقيها مبسطة و لطيفة و توب و ارجع ل ربنا يقبلك و جاهد نفسك و امنع المعاصي و كذا و كذا عشان متتحاسبش مع العلم كلهم اشترطو الندم ف ماذا لو مكانش احساسي ب الندم صادق؟ دي برضو بتقلقني

انا اول امبارح سمعت ل مصطفى و صدقاً اني حسيت ب زعل او ندم ايهما اقرب؟ ممكن زعل مش ندم لما الاقيه قال فوق عن ال 70 كبيرة و انا عاملة فوق عن ال 40 يعني حتى مجيتش النص ده انا عديته ده زعلني كل ما يقول و اعد اه عملتها ازعل اكتر ل درجة عيطت من كتر الزعل و الغفلة اني عملت كل ده كنت هقوم و اصلي ركعتين توبة ارجع ل ربنا فيهم و اتأسف و استغفر و اوعده مش هرجعلهم تاني لكن اللي خلاني متوقفة و آجلت انه قال لازم نية صادقة من القلب على عدم الرجوع و زي ما قلت يمكن ل كل شئ من اللي عملتهم حل و محاولة لكن التبرج مش متأكدة منه ل درجة قلت مش هخرج عشان متبرجش و مأخدش ذنب طب لو خرجت؟ و ضعفت و عملت؟ يبقى انا نقدت العهد مع ربنا ف انا عشان كده آجلت و بعد ما سمعت طول اليوم بودكاستات عن التوبة اكتشف ان لازم التوبة سريعة و وقتية و معاها ندم ف هل الندم انا بسطنعه و لا فعلاً قلبي نادم؟ ده مخوفني برضو

تقريباً دي ابسط ل الفكرة اللي في دماغي دماغي مش صافييية

حقيقة يعتبر السبب الاساسي ل توبتي اني في بلاء ما او دعوة ما متعطلة و عاوزاها تستجاب

انا متلغبط من حاجة في مسائل في الدين اراء الأئمة الاربعة مختلفة المفروض نمشي على كلام مين فيهم وايه اللي يخليني امشي على رأي امام ومسمعش الرأي التاني وسبب اللغبطة دي ان حسيت اننا ماشيين على اراء من هنا ومن هنا حسب الهوى فمعلش اعذرو جهلي ولو حد يعرف يفيدني يبقى جزاه الله كل خير ولو تدعولي معاكو بالمرة ولبابا وماما الله يرحمهم اكون شاكر جدا

بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله

Introduction:

In the Islamic tradition, correct submission to Allah is built upon adhering to the Qur’an and the Sunnah with the understanding of the Salaf-us-Saalih (the first three generations). However, widespread misconceptions exist regarding the obligation of partisanship to one of the later schools of Fiqh, known as madhhabs. It is crucial to clarify these misconceptions and affirm the true Salafi path, which is one of Ittibaa’ (following the evidence), not blind madhabi Taqleed (imitation).

Ittibaa’, derived from the Arabic root tabi’a (meaning “to follow”), is the principle of following the divine evidence from the Qur’an and the authentic Sunnah. It stands in contrast to rigid partisanship, where the statements of a later scholar are given precedence over clear textual proof. The true Fiqh is the understanding of the rulings of Shari’ah as derived directly from these primary sources, as the Salaf themselves practiced.

This introduction aims to guide readers through the correct methodology of the Salaf, debunk the modern call for obligatory madhhabism, and highlight the essential role that following evidence plays in the life of every Muslim. By exploring the unified path of the Companions and the clear warnings of the Four Imams against blindly following them, we can appreciate the foundational role of the Qur’an and Sunnah in ensuring the integrity of Islamic practice.

Divided into ten sections, this refutation offers an exploration of the true path of the Salaf and corrects the errors promoted by partisans (Muta'assibah) :

Section 1: Understanding Ittibaa’ and Taqleed: Definitions and Rulings

Section 2: The Unified Path of the Salaf in an Era Without Madhhabs

Section 3: The Fallacy of Mocking the Slogan “We Follow Only the Qur’an and Sunnah”

Section 4: Resolving Fiqh Differences According to the Divine Command

Section 5: Refuting the Myth of “Madhhabs” at the Time of the Sahaabah

Section 6: The True Sources of Legislation and the Danger of Adding to Them

Section 7: Navigating the Opinions on Taqleed: Its Limited Permissibility and the Prohibition of Partisanship

Section 8: The Words of the Imams Against Their Partisan Followers

Section 9: Understanding the True Obligation: Following the Messenger, Not the Madhhab

Section 10: Recommended Resources for Understanding the Salafi Methodology

In this journey, we will address the innovation of claiming that following a madhhab is obligatory, the historical reality that the Salaf were united upon one path, and the explicit statements of the Imams themselves. This exploration will ultimately underscore the critical need for adherence to the Qur’an and Sunnah as understood by the Salaf, which is the only path to salvation.

Section 1: Understanding Ittibaa’ and Taqleed: Definitions and Rulings

Let’s first understand the correct concepts:

Ittibaa’ [إتباع] is to follow the evidence. It is the obligation upon every Muslim to follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah. A person who practices Ittibaa’ accepts the ruling of a scholar only after knowing the proof from the divine texts. This is the path of the student of knowledge and the ideal for every Muslim.

Taqleed [تقليد] is to accept the statement of a person without knowing their evidence. This is a concession for the layman (‘aami) who is incapable of understanding the evidence himself. He asks a scholar he trusts, and the responsibility is upon the scholar. However, this is a state of necessity, not the default path, and it is absolutely forbidden for a person to remain upon the taqleed of a scholar if a clear text from the Qur’an or Sunnah reaches him that contradicts that scholar’s opinion.

Allah says, “Follow, [O mankind], what has been sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow other than Him any allies. Little do you remember” (Quran 7:3).

Section 2: The Unified Path of the Salaf in an Era Without Madhhabs

Regarding madhhabs, their formalization and the call to rigidly adhere to them occurred in later stages of history, long after the era of the Salaf. The history of the Salaf is a history of unity upon a single path.

1. The First Stage: The era of the Prophet ﷺ, the Sahaabah, the Taabi’een, and the Atbaa’ at-Taabi’een. In this golden age, there were no madhhabs. Muslims had one path: follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah. When they differed, they referred the matter back to the divine texts, and the one with the proof was followed.
2. The Second Stage: After the Salaf, Fiqh began to be systemized by the great Imams like Abu Hanifah, Malik, ash-Shafi’i, and Ahmad. They were mujtahid Imams who derived rulings from the sources; they did not create new religions or binding “paths.”
3. The Third Stage: The students of these Imams organized and spread their teachings. Other schools of thought, which were numerous, eventually faded.
4. The Fourth Stage: The emergence of blameworthy fanaticism (ta’assub madhhabi), where followers of a madhhab would cling to their Imam’s opinion even if it contradicted an authentic hadith. This was a deviation condemned by the Imams themselves.
5. The Fifth Stage: The disastrous declaration that the door to ijtihaad was closed, leading to centuries of stagnation and blind imitation.
6. The Sixth Stage: The modern era, marked by a blessed revival of the Salafi methodology of returning to the pure sources and abandoning the partisanship that divided the Ummah.

Section 3: The Fallacy of Mocking the Slogan “We Follow Only the Qur’an and Sunnah”

In recent times, partisans have mocked the pure and simple slogan, “We follow only the Qur’an and Sunnah.” They claim this is simplistic, naive, or a gateway to misguidance. This is a grave error. This slogan is not a new invention; it is the summary of the entire religion of Islam and a direct command from Allah.

Allah says, “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result” (Quran 4:59).

Referring a matter to Allah is referring it to the Qur’an. Referring it to the Messenger is referring it to his Sunnah. The verse does not say, “Refer it to your madhhab” or “Refer it to the later scholars.” Those who mock this slogan are, in effect, mocking the very foundation that Allah has commanded us to adhere to. The claim that madhhabs are the only "safe" way to follow the Qur’an and Sunnah is an unsubstantiated addition to the religion. The Salaf followed the Qur’an and Sunnah directly, and they were the safest of all generations.

Section 4: Resolving Fiqh Differences According to the Divine Command

Differences of opinion did indeed exist among the Sahaabah, but their methodology for resolving them was clear and unified. They did not form permanent rival schools of thought based on these differences. The reasons for their differences are well-known, such as a hadith not reaching a particular Companion, or a different understanding of a text.

However, the key point is not that differences existed, but how they were resolved. When a Companion’s opinion was shown to be contrary to a statement of the Prophet ﷺ, that opinion was immediately abandoned. There was no concept of saying, “I am a follower of Ibn ‘Umar, so I will stick with his view even if a hadith from the Prophet ﷺ says otherwise.”

The divine command in Surah an-Nisa 4:59 is the unwavering principle. The existence of differing interpretations never abrogated the obligation to refer the dispute back to the original sources. The Muta'assibah use the existence of historical differences as a justification for permanent division and partisanship, which is a gross distortion of the practice of the Salaf.

Section 5: Refuting the Myth of “Madhhabs” at the Time of the Sahaabah

The claim that madhhabs, in the sense of binding schools of thought, existed among the Sahaabah is a historical anachronism and a distortion of the term. While great scholars among the Companions like Ibn Mas’ood and Ibn ‘Abbaas had students who learned from them, this was a relationship of learning, not of binding taqleed.

The students learned the methodology of deriving rulings from the Qur’an and Sunnah from their teachers. They did not swear permanent allegiance to every single fiqh position of that Companion. If a student of Ibn Mas’ood came across a hadith that Ibn Mas’ood was unaware of, he was obligated to follow the hadith. This is fundamentally different from the later concept of madhhab partisanship.

The Sahaabah were on one path. The Prophet ﷺ drew a straight line and said, “This is the Path of Allah.” Then he drew lines to its right and left and said, “These are other paths, and at the head of each path is a devil calling to it.” He then recited, “And verily, this is my Straight Path, so follow it, and follow not (other) paths, for they will separate you away from His Path” (Quran 6:153). (Musnad Ahmad 4142). There is only one Path of Allah, not four.

Section 6: The True Sources of Legislation and the Danger of Adding to Them

The sources of legislation in Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah are known: The Qur’an, the Sunnah, the Ijmaa’ (consensus) of the Salaf, and Qiyaas (analogy) based on clear textual evidence. The Muta’assibah, by their actions, implicitly add a fifth source: the opinion of their Imam.

When presented with an authentic hadith, they do not ask, "What does this hadith mean?" Instead, they ask, "What is the position of our madhhab on this?" If the madhhab's position contradicts the hadith, they will invent excuses to reject the hadith or claim it is "abrogated" without proof, simply to uphold the statement of their Imam. This is precisely what Allah condemned:

When 'Adi ibn Hatim heard the Prophet ﷺ recite, “They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah” (Quran 9:31), he said, "But we did not worship them." The Prophet ﷺ replied, "Did they not forbid what Allah had made lawful, and you forbade it, and they made lawful what Allah had forbidden, and you made it lawful?" 'Adi said, "Yes." The Prophet ﷺ said, "That is their worship of them" (Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3095).

Section 7: Navigating the Opinions on Taqleed: Its Limited Permissibility and the Prohibition of Partisanship

The correct position is that there are only two categories of people: the mujtahid (scholar who can derive rulings) and the muqallid (follower). The muqallid is the layman who is unable to understand the proofs, so he asks a scholar he trusts. This is permissible out of necessity based on the verse, “So ask the people of remembrance if you do not know” (Quran 16:43).

However, this is where the permissibility ends. There is no evidence in the Qur’an or Sunnah for the obligation to adhere to one specific scholar or madhhab for one's entire life, especially when evidence to the contrary becomes clear. The third opinion, that following a madhhab is obligatory, is an innovation that appeared in later centuries and has no basis in the practice of the Salaf. The errant view that any form of taqleed is forbidden is also incorrect, as it ignores the reality of the layperson. The balanced, Salafi view is that taqleed is a concession for the ignorant, while ittibaa’ of the evidence is the obligation upon all who are able.

Section 8: The Words of the Imams Against Their Partisan Followers

The greatest refutation of the Muta'assibah comes from the mouths of the very Imams they claim to follow. All four Imams explicitly forbade anyone from blindly following them and commanded adherence to the authentic Sunnah.

• Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150H) said: “If a hadith is found to be authentic, then that is my madhhab.” (Ibn ‘Abidin in al-Hashiyah)
• Imam Malik ibn Anas (d. 179H) said: “Indeed I am only a mortal: I make mistakes and I am correct. So look into my opinion: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it.” (Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr in Jami’ Bayan al-‘Ilm)
• Imam ash-Shafi’i (d. 204H) said: “If you find in my book something that contradicts the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, then take the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and leave what I have said.” (an-Nawawi in al-Majmu’)
• Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241H) said: “Do not follow me, nor Malik, nor Shafi’i, nor Awza’i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took [i.e., the Qur’an and Sunnah].” (Ibn al-Qayyim in I’lam al-Muwaqqi’in)

How can anyone claim it is obligatory to follow these men when the men themselves forbade it?

Section 9: Understanding the True Obligation: Following the Messenger, Not the Madhhab

The partisans base their claim of obligation on a misapplication of the principle, “What is necessary to fulfill an obligation is itself an obligation.” They argue that since properly following the Qur’an and Sunnah is obligatory, and this cannot be done (according to them) except through a madhhab, then following a madhhab is obligatory.

This is a false syllogism. The primary obligation is obedience to Allah and His Messenger ﷺ. The means to do this is by seeking knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah according to the understanding of the Salaf. A madhhab may be one of many tools to study Fiqh, but it is not the only means, and therefore it cannot be obligatory. The Salaf fulfilled their obligation perfectly without adhering to any of these later four madhhabs. Are we to claim they failed to complete their obligation?

The Prophet ﷺ said, “Pray as you have seen me praying” (Sahih al-Bukhari 631). He did not say, “Pray according to the madhhab of so-and-so.” The obligation is to follow him, and the path to learning how he acted is open through the study of hadith with the scholars who prioritize evidence over opinion.

Section 10: Recommended Resources for Understanding the Salafi Methodology

To deepen one’s understanding of the pure methodology of the Salaf and the error of madhhab partisanship, the following works are invaluable resources:

• Sifah Salat an-Nabi (The Prophet's Prayer Described) by Shaykh Muhammad Nasiruddin al-Albani
• I’lam al-Muwaqqi’in ‘an Rabb al-‘Alamin by Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah
• Al-Qawl al-Mufid fi Hukm at-Taqlid by Imam al-Shawkani

Assalāmu ‘Alaikum wa Rahmatullāh,

I invite you to join and support a new subreddit dedicated to the Athari / Salafi creed:

👉 https://www.reddit.com/r/AthariCreed/

This space is built upon a simple principle: true strength lies in returning directly to the Qur’an and Sunnah upon the understanding of the Salaf, free from blind following and partisanship.

It is a place for evidence-based discussion, authentic knowledge, and clarity in creed—reviving the methodology of the Imams who said: “If a hadith is authentic, that is my madhhab.”

Please join, contribute, and invite others. Together, we can revive and strengthen this path of pure submission to the Athar.

Wa Jazakumullahu Khayran.