Ijtihad and Taqlid

All praise and thanks is due to Allah Who created the human being with an intellect that conceptualizes the existence of its Lord and recognizes the Creator's authority. We concluded the first portion of this series by examining the birth of Ijtihad, explaining its significance to the Ummah, and presenting a brief historical outline of how it related to the differences of opinion that arose between Muslims. The historical factors surrounding the differing opinions that developed into schools of thought are directly related to the situation of Muslims of our present era.

By the sixth century after Hijra, Muslims began sectioning off into numerous schools of thought. Most of them started out with good intentions. Among the prominent schools that developed were the scholastic philosophers, the mystics (sufi), and the people of the hadith sciences. All had the goal of religious reform. Islam itself had been preserved, but the minds of Muslims were subjected to confusing rhetoric from many directions. Greek philosophy and other forms of thinking, alien to Islam, became common among the uneducated Muslims.

What occurred as a result of this confusion was arguably a tragedy, but one could also argue that it was a necessity. The Muslim scholars, with the backing of the rulers of their time, effectively closed the door on Ijtihad. Independent thinking became practically forbidden (haraam), and religious thought was reserved only for the "learned few." Thus the concept of Taqlid was introduced.

Taqlid is an Arabic word that basically means: "...imitation; copying; blind unquestioning adoption (of concepts or ideas); uncritical faith (e.g., in a source's authoritativeness); adoption of the legal decision of a madhab (school of thought)."

The concept itself was not completely new. Muslims during the life of the Prophet (saaws) had every reason to imitate him since he received revelation and was considered to be free from sins. Also, the shi'a schools of thought extended this authority after the death of the Prophet (saaws) to their Imams, all of whom, in their opinion, held this similar sinless status. In that regard, there was no reason to question the leader (Prophet Muhammad) as he was the receiver of the source of authority, which was from Allah.

For the section of Muslims who did not follow Imams after the Prophet's death and for the overwhelming majority of Muslims after the 3rd century after hijra, Ijtihad was a necessity of daily life. By the 6th century after hijra, taqlid emerged as the remedy to a problem while also the cause of another sickness. While Taqlid lessened the chance for error in that only the "scholarly" were allowed to make intellectual decisions, it separated the masses of Muslims from the sources (the Qur'an and Sunnah). This was not a major problem when the scholars were still living. When they passed, however, the situation worsened. With the exception of the few schools of thought mentioned above, the majority of Muslims were closed off from reasoning. Thinking for oneself became taboo in Islam.

The call for codification of the schools of thought became loudly heard even from the office of the caliphate, and eventually this gave rise to the madhabs (schools of thought). Some khalifas even adopted particular schools of thought and forbade the following of others. The scholars that remained were reduced to only studying the four Imams that had come before them and were restricted from anything outside of that prism.

"The scholars' main function was to read old texts to their public, give simple explanations, summarize long discussions, and make minimum commentary. Some 8th and 9th century hijra scholars were condemned for practicing Ijtihad; were banned from issuing fatawa and had their works confiscated." ³

Because of this seemingly arbitrary codification, only 4 schools were included within the fold of Islam, while others, no matter how relevant or supported by texts their schools may or may not have been, were excluded. Thus, the final stake was driven into the separating crack that had already begun to form within the Ummah. Although the initial differences of opinions that existed were merely matters of jurisprudence, the codification of only 4 schools of thought escalated the matter to that of violent sectarian proportions.

The 4 schools, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanafi, and Hanbali had no fewer differences amongst themselves than did the other schools, yet these were all considered acceptable to the exclusion of the others. Independent thinking was completely suppressed, and it became obligatory to belong to one of the 4 schools.

Remnants of these ideals have survived until present times. Many Muslims still believe that one must belong to a madhab (school of thought) to be considered a legitimate Muslim. Over the years, however, revivers of the Faith have periodically arisen out of the darkness and backwardness of authoritative instruction. Their innovative thinking has captured the hearts of millions, opened the eyes of the blind, and revived the minds of the mentally dead. In the final portion of our series, we will examine the revival of religious thought that is taking place in the Ummah today and also recognize some of the revivers of the Faith, insha'Allah.