Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Marja Vs Sunni Schools Of Though

Rate this topic


ShiaBrother1

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam alaykum

II was having a talk with a sunni about the need for imams. One of the reasons i gave was so we dont have all these schools that sunni's do ( hanfai, maliki etc etc ). He mentioned the Marja's we follow and how it is the same. I told him its not the same and its like the Fatwa's sunni imams pass today. Anyways i was thinking about what he said and really its not much different? I mean one thing is haram as a hanafi and another halal as a maliki so isnt that the same with us? One Marja says Music is completely haram and another gives conditions. One says Zanjeer is haram and another says it makru and another says it is recommended. So really whats the difference??

Marja Vs Sunni Schools Of ThoughT

:)

Edited by ShiaBrother1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

^^

dont get what u mean

i mean reason we have 12 imam AS is bcuz Prophets said there will be 12. Im saying need for Imams AS doesnt need to be understood by aql bcuz we know from the Prophet that there will be 12. Allah also didnt need prophets bcuz He could just give every1 the wahi but whatever Allah does its bcuz of His own will even if we dont know or undrstnd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

i mean reason we have 12 imam AS is bcuz Prophets said there will be 12. Im saying need for Imams AS doesnt need to be understood by aql bcuz we know from the Prophet that there will be 12. Allah also didnt need prophets bcuz He could just give every1 the wahi but whatever Allah does its bcuz of His own will even if we dont know or undrstnd

But my question was about Marja's and Sunni schools

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salaam alaykum

II was having a talk with a sunni about the need for imams. One of the reasons i gave was so we dont have all these schools that sunni's do ( hanfai, maliki etc etc ). He mentioned the Marja's we follow and how it is the same. I told him its not the same and its like the Fatwa's sunni imams pass today. Anyways i was thinking about what he said and really its not much different? I mean one thing is haram as a hanafi and another halal as a maliki so isnt that the same with us? One Marja says Music is completely haram and another gives conditions. One says Zanjeer is haram and another says it makru and another says it is recommended. So really whats the difference??

Marja Vs Sunni Schools Of ThoughT

:)

No matter the differences in opinions of maraja, in the end, when the Imam (a) arrives, they will all unite and follow his path. In contrast, Sunni schools are all over the place, with each following their own random philosophies, personalities, and visions.

There is no Imam (a) to unite the brothers of Ahlul Sunna wa Jammat, or at least in as well a defined term as it is for followers of Ahlul-Bayt (a).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaam alaykum

II was having a talk with a sunni about the need for imams. One of the reasons i gave was so we dont have all these schools that sunni's do ( hanfai, maliki etc etc ). He mentioned the Marja's we follow and how it is the same. I told him its not the same and its like the Fatwa's sunni imams pass today. Anyways i was thinking about what he said and really its not much different?

(salam)

They are not the same. The biggest difference is that Shias follow marjas who was alive in their life time. All the Sunni Imams died a thousand years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Little things such as zanjeer or music do not shake the faith, our marajah are very consistent with their rulings, salat, fasting, hajj, zakat khums consensus and unity is there for our core beliefs and tawassul, khums, tabarra and tawalla, imamah,day of judgement, infallibility of Prophets(s) and Imams(as) all pretty consistent, .if you read through Al kafi and our other books your going to find hadiths with strong chains contradicting eachother and thus there is always going to be minor differences but in the end, i dont see marajah disagreeing to much especially on most things like malangs and others blow it up to be, the differences tend to come with modern day issues and not classical fiqh issues however sunni schools have differences in their beliefs, when you have sunni schools debating whether we have free will or predestination or whether you pray hands down or folded and if folded where do the arms go, whether tawassul is permitted? whether the Prophet(s) was infallible? whether visiting shrines of holy personalities is allowed? these are differences that come about when they all believe is the sahihat, how does that work? we dont even have a sahih book and we agree so much more than them. these are not minor issues especially free will and predestination. I ask you what are you going to do if we didnt have marajah? we would be extremely lost in fiqh. The Imams(as) delegated their companions to give fatawa to the people even during their lives, this is the ultimate proof for the need of scholars to give haram and halal.

Ali Ibn al-Mosayyeb said: “I said to Imam Redha (a.s): My residence is far away (from you) and I cannot reach out to you for every matter. From whom should I learn my religion? The Imam replied: ‘From Zakariya Ibn Adam al-Qomi who is trustworthy in the matter of this world and the religion.’- Rejaal al-Kashi, p.49

Ask your friend as to how is it that their sunni imams lived among and some even studied under the sahaba and could not even agree whether the Prophet(s) prayed with hands by side or folded? the same sahaba who prayed behind him everyday, and sunnis ask why the need for Imams (as) ? subhanallah

ws

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter the differences in opinions of maraja, in the end, when the Imam (a) arrives, they will all unite and follow his path. In contrast, Sunni schools are all over the place, with each following their own random philosophies, personalities, and visions.

There is no Imam (a) to unite the brothers of Ahlul Sunna wa Jammat, or at least in as well a defined term as it is for followers of Ahlul-Bayt (a).

We have the same belief about the Mahdi. When he comes he will cause all the other school of thought to expire.

In contrast, Sunni schools are all over the place, with each following their own random philosophies, personalities, and visions.

I've seen shia calling each other sons of fornication for not saying Ali un Wali Allah in namaz.

perfect how can we forget qiyas is a huge part of the sunni schools

The concept of Mattam in your madhab is derived from Qiyas itself. It was never done on a traditional basis by the infallible ones.

Edited by Abdaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

I would think people should be comparing things that are fundamental to Islam (according to both the Shia and Sunni sect). Usually you start from the top of the list and then go to the bottom. Top of the list here can mean tawhed, Nubuwaah, Salat and ..etc.

The bottom of the list can be things like shape or color of your beard, favorite color according to Islamic faith ..etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I dont think i got a proper answer to my question. I do understand there are many other ways you can prove imammate. But my question was this.

We Say Sunni's have different schools. something that maybe halal according to a Hanafi maybe Haram to a Shafi but arnt we the same? Something that is halal according to one marja maybe haram to another and there are many examples. So how are we any different as far as this issue goes or can we say we have the same problem as Sunnis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

There is different view of Ijtehad between Shias and Sunnis. This comparison is entirely wrong when we think this way.

1. Among Sunnis the four imams did Ijtehad and brought forward entirely different "Fiqhs". The variation is terrible among Sunnis. This is not a biased observation but it is apparent from the facts and history. Abbasids closed the door of ijtehad and it is still close because the ijtehad of Sunni scholars was not interpreting the fiqh e Muhammad (pbuh) rather it was making entirely new fiqh. You can see it easily when you do comparative study between the fiqhs of four Sunni schools of thought. These contradiction became so evident that a group of Sunnis preferred to be "Ghair e Muqalideen". One more aspect of the Sunni Ijtehad is that many sunni scholars did Ijtehad even against the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Sunni scholars are off course nothing before Sunni elders like Abu Bakar, Umer and Usman and even Muawvia (L.A). Who can negate the Ijtehad of Umer against the Sunnah? Taraweeh, Stopping Mutah Marriage, Talaq e Biddah (which is in vogue in the Sunni world now), Leaving the prayer when water is not available (In a way not allowing Tayamum) are few examples of Umer's ijtehad against Quran and Sunnah.

2. Among Shias the Ijtehad is "deduction of ruling as per Quran and Sunnah for different problems". Among Shias Ijtehad can not be made against a "Nas of Quran and Sunnah". Therefore we can not compare it with the Sunni schools of thoughts. Among Shia it is established fact that no one can do Ijtehad in "Usool" and it is done only in "Faru" but we saw in history that Umer did ijtehad against the Prophet (pbuh) many times like in the time of Sulah Hudaibiya, and the incident of pen and paper.

So in my humble view this comparison is full of flaws and there is fundamental difference on ijtehad itself between the Sunnis and Shias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

its not problem - its rehma that our Imams AS gave us such rich litrutre to make many rulings from it and that marja can make many rulings. Sunni has to sit for hours and find ways to interpret one text or 2 or 3 and find his way but our Imam AS gave us something much better. Even Nasbis say that Prophet said difference of the scholar is a mercy for their umma

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The differences aren't that severe, especially if you stick with the mainstream scholars and away from the more controversial ones. Also, if you look to the historical trend of the jomhur views, that is, what views were more common amongst all Shi`i jurists throughout the centuries as a whole, instead of looking at where an individual jurist might have held a less common view. Historically the difference have more often been along the lines of is X wajib or mustahabb, is Y haram or makrooh, etc., rather than one jurist says X is wajib the other jurist says it's haram. The differences arise on how to understand the same set of texts, whether one considers a text reliable or not, taqiyya hadiths, etc. But again, stick with the mainstream and you won't find much in terms of significant differences amongst them.

With the Sunni madhahib it's not at all like that. The differences can be very contradictory and irreconcilable, which is why when I met with some very traditional Sunni `ulama in Iran (Hanafi Maturidis), it was mentioned to me how the Shafi`is there and the Hanafis can't pray behind one another (there were both there at the school), not because they thought the other was kafir of course but because by the standards of the one's school the salat of the other was incorrect. The differences arise in part because the very basis, the usool, of their fiqhs are so different from one another. So with the Hanafis, it was largely based off of qiyas, opinion, and so on, the Malikis claimed they went with the practice of the people of Madina, the Hanbalis were more athari based, the Shafi`is somewhat of a middle ground between athari and ijtihadi (I think... not sure on that one). When your fundamentals are so different with little common ground, it's not surprising you get such differences.

The hadith sources are also a very different world, in that Sunnis (when they are using them) have a much more limited set of hadiths they worked with, with a lot of details not being explained so they'd fill them in with the jurist's personal opinions, views of different companions, and whatever methods they accepted for usage. With our hadiths though, including as they do the hadiths of the twelve Imams (as), these details would be filled out. The disciples of the Imams (as) would ask them these very specific questions and pass down their answers to the succeeding generations. Hence, this type of guesswork you find in Sunnism doesn't have a place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was mentioned to me how the Shafi`is there and the Hanafis can't pray behind one another (there were both there at the school),

Why is this according to the 'Ulema you've "met" ? A hanafi can pray behind shaf'i and vice versa as long as the one praying behind the Imâm isn't aware of anything that goes against his own madhhab.

Edited by Abu'l Fadl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this according to the 'Ulema you've "met" ?

Um, because that's what they told me...? In a twisted way it does make sense, in that the one would be performing incorrect acts in their salat, so how could the other follow behind someone who in their madhhab was praying incorrectly? Especially with the Hanafis, one could do all sorts of crazy things in their salat that they consider valid. But even skipping most of the really weird stuff (like doing qira'at in Farsi, and ending your salat by passing gas), the Hanafis do not consider it wajib or even recommended to recite the basmala in al-Fatiha for example, while the Shafi`is believe it to be wajib. In fact, Hanafis don't even consider it wajib to recite al-Fatiha, any three ayat will do. So how would a Shafi`i pray behind someone who is leaving out part (or even all) of al-Fatiha in his salat? There are other differences as well. And what about the preliminaries, for example the four schools don't do the same wudu. Take the wiping of the head, is a little part sufficient or even washing or sprinkling of water (Shafi`i), wiping one fourth of the head (Hanafi), wiping the whole head except for the ears (Maliki), wiping the whole head and including the ears (Hanbali)? So according to the one the imam from the other would not have a proper wudu when they are praying. How then could they pray behind them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member

I have seen many civil cases pending in courts of Pakistan where Hanafi Brailavee, Hanafi Deobandi, Ahl e Hadith and Wahabis have filed cases against each other alleging that the adverse party have occupied their mosques. Even they have marked identities on their mosques. Brailvees mostly do not go to Deobandi mosques and vice versa. Is this the case among twelver Shias? No not at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Little things such as zanjeer or music do not shake the faith, our marajah are very consistent with their rulings, salat, fasting, hajj, zakat khums consensus and unity is there for our core beliefs and tawassul, khums, tabarra and tawalla, imamah,day of judgement, infallibility of Prophets(s) and Imams(as) all pretty consistent, .if you read through Al kafi and our other books your going to find hadiths with strong chains contradicting eachother and thus there is always going to be minor differences but in the end, i dont see marajah disagreeing to much especially on most things like malangs and others blow it up to be, the differences tend to come with modern day issues and not classical fiqh issues however sunni schools have differences in their beliefs, when you have sunni schools debating whether we have free will or predestination or whether you pray hands down or folded and if folded where do the arms go, whether tawassul is permitted? whether the Prophet(s) was infallible? whether visiting shrines of holy personalities is allowed? these are differences that come about when they all believe is the sahihat, how does that work? we dont even have a sahih book and we agree so much more than them. these are not minor issues especially free will and predestination. I ask you what are you going to do if we didnt have marajah? we would be extremely lost in fiqh. The Imams(as) delegated their companions to give fatawa to the people even during their lives, this is the ultimate proof for the need of scholars to give haram and halal.

Ali Ibn al-Mosayyeb said: “I said to Imam Redha (a.s): My residence is far away (from you) and I cannot reach out to you for every matter. From whom should I learn my religion? The Imam replied: ‘From Zakariya Ibn Adam al-Qomi who is trustworthy in the matter of this world and the religion.’- Rejaal al-Kashi, p.49

Ask your friend as to how is it that their sunni imams lived among and some even studied under the sahaba and could not even agree whether the Prophet(s) prayed with hands by side or folded? the same sahaba who prayed behind him everyday, and sunnis ask why the need for Imams (as) ? subhanallah

ws

Beautiful! Mashallah :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I have seen many civil cases pending in courts of Pakistan where Hanafi Brailavee, Hanafi Deobandi, Ahl e Hadith and Wahabis have filed cases against each other alleging that the adverse party have occupied their mosques. Even they have marked identities on their mosques. Brailvees mostly do not go to Deobandi mosques and vice versa. Is this the case among twelver Shias? No not at all.

(salam)

I was not aware of this! See I always felt the Sunni sects were very different from each other, even though they are under one umbrella (sunnah wal jamah).

Bro Macisaac brought up an interesting point. How would you pray behind an Imam who is praying according to his sunni sect (if you are not a member of that particular sect)? Do you try to follow his action or do what you are always thought (according to your own sect)? :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, because that's what they told me...? In a twisted way it does make sense, in that the one would be performing incorrect acts in their salat, so how could the other follow behind someone who in their madhhab was praying incorrectly? Especially with the Hanafis, one could do all sorts of crazy things in their salat that they consider valid. But even skipping most of the really weird stuff (like doing qira'at in Farsi, and ending your salat by passing gas)

This is a lie but it's not anything new though coming from a 12r. Qir'ât is only accepted in Arabic and about ending the prayer with by passing gas? I've read only that after tashahhud and durud if I remember correctly of the last rak'ah that one who passes gas then his prayer isn't broken because giving taslîm isn't obligatory but still it is recommended to do it over.

the Hanafis do not consider it wajib or even recommended to recite the basmala in al-Fatiha for example, while the Shafi`is believe it to be wajib.

It is not a specific sunna in prayer to recite the basmala (saying bismillah) before the recitation of a sura after having recited the Fatiha.

However, it is good (hasan) to do so when starting to recite a sura from the beginning. [ibn Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar]

It is an emphasized sunna to say it before the Fatiha, and good before beginning other suras. [shurunbulali, Maraqi]

for example the four schools don't do the same wudu. Take the wiping of the head, is a little part sufficient or even washing or sprinkling of water (Shafi`i), wiping one fourth of the head (Hanafi), wiping the whole head except for the ears (Maliki), wiping the whole head and including the ears (Hanbali)? So according to the one the imam from the other would not have a proper wudu when they are praying. How then could they pray behind them?

It may suffice in the Hanafi fiqh to do wiping one fourth of the head but it is sunnah to do the whole head which is also recommended for the Imâm leading the prayer when it's known that other muqallidûn of madhâhib prays behind him.

Edited by Abu'l Fadl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a lie but it's not anything new though coming from a 12r. Qir'ât is only accepted in Arabic and about ending the prayer with by passing gas? I've read only that after tashahhud and durud if I remember correctly of the last rak'ah that one who passes gas then his prayer isn't broken because giving taslîm isn't obligatory but still it is recommended to do it over.

He likes to label fithna scholars to be the representative of the ahle sunnah. Let me show you an example of internal wars within the 12rs.

Here a shia scholar mentions how other 12rs calls other the sons of fornication for not saying Ali Un Wali Allah in the Tashduth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIeAm9O7eMU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Who makes the ruling in the Sunni school? School is singular here!

We as Shia, we pick our own Marja and we follow him until the Marja dies, then we choose a new Marja.

However, let us say that there are 1200 ulemas in the Hanifi school. The questions are:

1. What type of training these ulemas get?

2. Who certifies them as ulemas?

3. At what level the ulemas are allowed to issue fatwas?

4. Are the adherent restricted to the fatwas of one ulema only or they can pick and choose the fatwas?

And many, many more questions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He likes to label fithna scholars to be the representative of the ahle sunnah.

Really now? So the Maturidi Hanafi scholars of North-Eastern Iran (Turkmanis), Sufis by the way and staunchly anti-Wahhabi, are "fithna scholars" according to you?

Let me show you an example of internal wars within the 12rs.

Here a shia scholar mentions how other 12rs calls other the sons of fornication for not saying Ali Un Wali Allah in the Tashduth.

As usual, you bring something irrelevant or very peripheral, and in the form of yet another link to a youtube video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really now? So the Maturidi Hanafi scholars of North-Eastern Iran (Turkmanis), Sufis by the way and staunchly anti-Wahhabi, are "fithna scholars" according to you?

You gave this example "With the Sunni madhahib it's not at all like that. The differences can be very contradictory and irreconcilable, which is why when I met with some very traditional Sunni `ulama in Iran (Hanafi Maturidis), it was mentioned to me how the Shafi`is there and the Hanafis can't pray behind one another (there were both there at the school), not because they thought the other was kafir of course but because by the standards of the one's school the salat of the other was incorrect. The differences arise in part because the very basis, the usool, of their fiqhs are so different from one another. So with the Hanafis, it was largely based off of qiyas, opinion, and so on, the Malikis claimed they went with the practice of the people of Madina, the Hanbalis were more athari based, the Shafi`is somewhat of a middle ground between athari and ijtihadi (I think... not sure on that one). When your fundamentals are so different with little common ground, it's not surprising you get such differences."

Just because someone is anti wahabi it doesn't give them a green light to make a fatwa like that. Whoever says a Hanafi can't pray behind a Shafi is fithna based follower.

As usual, you bring something irrelevant or very peripheral, and in the form of yet another link to a youtube video.

Its a fiqhi issue where your scholars go so far calling each other sons of fornication. Also, there is an issue with Jummah and eid namaz. Some of your scholars even say its not compulsory till the reappearance of the 12th imam.

Let's not forget how Irani shias fought against Iraqi shias because one accepted Waliath e faqih and the other didn't.

Abdaal what that link has to do with the topic?

I am just showing you differences that exist within the same sect of followers.

Edited by Abdaal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

perfect how can we forget qiyas is a huge part of the sunni schools

99- æáÇ íÌæÒ ÇÓÊÎÑÇÌ ÇáÃÍßÇã Ýí ÇáÓãÚíÇÊ ÈÞíÇÓ æáÇ ÇÌÊåÇÏ

99 – And it is not permissible to extract the ahkam in the traditions by way of qiyas and ijtihad.

100- ÃãÇ ÇáÚÞáíÇÊ ÝíÏÎáåÇ ÇáÞíÇÓ æÇáÇÌÊåÇÏ

100 – However, in regards to the intellectual matters then qiyas and ijtihad do enter in it.

http://www.*******.org/kalam/mukhtasar-aqaid-ash-shia-al-imamiyya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a lie but it's not anything new though coming from a 12r.

This is ignorance of your own madhhabs, but that’s not anything new coming from an `aami :-)

Qir'ât is only accepted in Arabic

فإن افتتح الصلاة بالفارسة أو قرأ فيها بالفارسية أو ذبح وسمى بالفارسية وهو يحسن العربية أجزأه عند أبي حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى

So if one opens the salat in Farsi or does qira’at in it in Farsi or slaughters (an animal) and does the naming in Farsi and he (is able to) do well in Arabic, that suffices him according to Abu Hanifa may Allah ta`ala have mercy on him.

- al-hidaya fii sharh al-bidayat al-mubadi

and about ending the prayer with by passing gas? I've read only that after tashahhud and durud if I remember correctly of the last rak'ah that one who passes gas then his prayer isn't broken because giving taslîm isn't obligatory but still it is recommended to do it over.

Actually, he also says tashahhud isn’t wajib either:

اختلفوا في وجوب التشهد، وفي المختار منه، فذهب مالك، وأبو حنيفة وجماعة إلى أن التشهد ليس بواجب وذهبت طائفة إلى وجوبه، وبه قال الشافعي، وأحمد، وداود.

They have differed in the wujub of tashahhud and in the selected (?) from it. So Malik, Abu Hanifa, and a group have believed it to not be wajib and a group have believed in its wujub, by that have said as-Shafi`i, Ahmad and Dawud.

-bidaya al-mujtahid

You are correct in that he also stated taslim not to be wajib. As to the passing gas, or more accurately having a hadath:

وأما أبو حنيفة فذهب إلى ما رواه عبد الرحمن بن زياد الافريقي أن عبد الرحمن بن رافع، وبكر بن سوادة حدثاه عن عبد الله بن عمروا بن العاص قال: قال رسول الله (ص): إذا جلس الرجل في آخر صلاته فأحدث قبل أن يسلم، فقد تمت صلاته

However Abu Hanifa went by what `Abd ar-Rahman b. Ziyad al-Ifriqi narrated that `Abd ar-Rahman b. Rafi` and Bakr b. Sawada (?) narrated from `Abdullah b. `Amr b. al-`As (that) he said: The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said: When the man sits in the end of his salat and has a hadath prior to doing taslim, then his salat is complete.

- same source as above

It is not a specific sunna in prayer to recite the basmala (saying bismillah) before the recitation of a sura after having recited the Fatiha.

However, it is good (hasan) to do so when starting to recite a sura from the beginning. [ibn Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar]

It is an emphasized sunna to say it before the Fatiha, and good before beginning other suras. [shurunbulali, Maraqi]

I wasn’t talking about the sura, but sura al-Fatiha. According to Shafi`i, the basmala is wajib to recite as it is part of al-Fatiha itself, and according to them must be done out loud in jahri salat, quietly in the sirri salat. The Hanafis however do it silently. So how could the two be reconciled during maghrib, `isha and fajr? Even worse is when you add in Malik’s opinion not to recite it at all in the maktuba salat. So according to these madhahib, the others are doing something wrong in their salat according to their own madhhab. Can you pray behind someone who is intentionally praying in a manner you consider invalid?

One might add that according to Abu Hanifa, you don’t even need to recite al-Fatiha period in the salat, but any part of the Quran will do (and remember, in Farsi too!):

واختلفوا في القراءة الواجبة في الصلاة، فرأى بعضهم أن الواجب من ذلك أم القرآن لمن حفظها، وأن ما عداها ليس فيه توقيت، ومن هؤلاء من أوجبها في كل ركعة، ومنهم من أوجبها في أكثر الصلاة، ومنهم من أوجبها في نصف الصلاة، ومنهم من أوجبها في ركعة من الصلاة، وبالاول قال الشافعي وهي أشهر الروايات عن مالك وقد روي عنه أنه إن قرأها في ركعتين من الرباعية، أجزأته. وأما من رأى أنها تجزئ في ركعة، فمنهم الحسن البصري، وكثير من فقهاء البصرة وأما أبو حنيفة فالواجب عنده إنما هو قراءة القرآن، أي آية اتفقت أن تقرأ، وحد أصحابه في ذلك ثلاث آيات قصار، أو آية طويلة مثل آية الدين، وهذا في الركعتين الاوليين. وأما في الاخيرتين، فيستحب عنده التسبيح فيهما دون القراءة وبه قال الكوفيون.ا.

And they differed in regards to the wajib qira’at in salat, so some of them said that the wajib of that is the mother of the Book (i.e. al-Fatiha) for the one who has memorized it, and that what is apart from it does not have a timing (?). And from them are those who consider it wajib in every rak`at. And from them are those who consider it wajib in most of the salat. And from them are those who consider it wajib in half of the salat. And from them are those who consider it wajib in (one) rak`at from the salat. And by the first believed ash-Shafi`I and it is the most famous narration from Malik, and it has been narrated from him that if it is recited in the two rak`at from the four (rak`at salat), that suffices him. As those who regarded that it suffice in a (single) rak`at, from them is al-Hasan al-Basri and many of the fuqaha of Basra.

As to Abu Hanifa, the wajib with him is only qira’a of the Quran, whichever ayat one happens to recite. And his companions defined that as three short ayat, or (one) long ayat like the ayat ad-dayn. And this is in the first two rak`at. As to the last two, then it is recommended according to him to do tasbih in them without qira’at, and by that the Kufans believed.

- same source

It may suffice in the Hanafi fiqh to do wiping one fourth of the head but it is sunnah to do the whole head which is also recommended for the Imâm leading the prayer when it's known that other muqallidûn of madhâhib prays behind him.

Say he didn’t though but instead stuck with what his madhhab requires. Could others legitimately pray behind him when according to them, he doesn’t have a wudu?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A major and pertinent difference is that among the Shi'i maraji', the 'door to ijtihad' is still open and they are always examining, re-evaluating, interpretating, and expanding the religious law to meet new challenges (such as 'is cloning halal?'). Therefore scholarship is a lot more live.

Whereas the 'door to ijtihad' was shut with the 4 Sunni madhhabs. Sunni scholars still make fatwas but they don't change the basis of the methods of the 4 schools and obviously these 4 leaders of the schools did not deal with a lot of current challenges. So this is why Sunni fiqh is less dynamic and there is much more variety of opinion among Sunni laypeople or even ulama about different issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...