Thread by @mnizami_uk

"Is taqlid permissible"

It's common sense.

1.Taqlid is not 'blind following', it's a technical shar'i term that's meant to safeguard against uninformed religion. It means relying on specialists who've done groundwork that u simply don't have the time, aptitude, or energy to do.

We do this in most realms of life with doctors, lawyers, even plumbers! So why is faith different? God tells us to identify & rely on the informed (mutafaqih) for the more complicated matters as long as they don't go against the principles of deen (like priests of Bani Isra'il)

2. "Just follow Qur'an & hadith." But there are many ayat/hadith on a particular issue & unless you've considered them all (in Arabic) you'll only follow a few & get the wrong end of the stick. There's no legit mufti in the universe that doesn't purport to follow Qur'an & hadith!

3. How will you build a narrative/position on a particular issue when the various ayat/hadith don't neatly sit together, or seem to say different things? What system of reasoning will you employ that can be consistently utilised across the board on all other issues (usul fiqh)?

How will you 'stress-test' your conclusions and what mechanisms do you have in place to determine your view is legit or not? If you have cogent answers to all of these then clearly you're a qualified & don't need to do taqlid. But till then...

4. "Follow what's literal (dhahir)" but literal from what - ONE hadith or all of them? It's like telling ppl to only look one way literally when crossing the road. Do we take wording generally, specifically, or contextually? And even dhahir nusus generally require reconciliation.

5. Taqlid of a scholar, like a doctor boils down to a matter of trust: one you trust to be faithful to God and what GOD wants, s/one that'll help you get to paradise. Somebody who also gets your situation/issues, can communicate clearly, and ofc is qualified to practice.

Re qualification: it's often very subjective. A lot has been written on this topic (in usul books) but in practice ppl usually go for v arbitrary & superficial markers. Perhaps practically it'd be the most shar'i informed amongst u who addresses things relevantly to your context.

6. Now ofc u can ask for evidences, bt it's logic really: you won't understand evidences better than him nor consider wider variables he has. (Even if he's criminal he'll still easily misguide you w/ dalil.)
If u try to compare his opinions to others for "strongest opinion"...

He's still in better stead than you to make those comparisons b/w variant scholarly opinions (which he's probably already done). So in effect, asking for evidence *to compare* is to take your own opinion over someone you've already determined is more informed than you.

On Qiyamah: "God I didn't know so I referred to the more informed w/ due diligence" is valid. Yes scholars will get few things wrong bt they're rarely off the mark in detrimental way, & as Prophet said, sincere scholars will be rewarded for exerting diligent efforts even if wrong

NB: If you *demand* evidence, he's under no obligation to provide it, just as you're under no legal obligation to consult him in particular (*moral* obligation to follow one more informed than u is another matter).

7. Anti-taqlid usually promoted by laymen w/ no knowledge of Sharia & fiqh so have some bizarre ideas re what it constitutes, & some scholars (usually muhaddithin) who's fiqh ends up a car crash. I've never heard a jurist advocate it to the laity as taqlid's just common sense.