Dangane da waɗannan la'antu bayyanannu na Alƙur'ani, to ta yaya za mu yi bayani game da sabanin da ya wakana a wasu lokuta tsakanin sahabban Manzon Allah ﷺ da malaman fiqhu na farko?

In view of these clear Qur’anic condemnations, how then do we account for the disagreement which occured at times among the Prophet’s (s.w.) companions (SahaabahO and the early scholars of Fiqh?

Bambancin ra'ayi da ya faru tsakanin Sahabbai galibi ya kasance na halitta kuma ba makawa ba ne. Yawancinsa ya samo asali ne daga bambancin iyawarsu ta tunani, wanda ya bayyana a cikin fassarorinsu daban-daban na ayoyin Alqur'ani da Hadisai. Akwai wasu dalilai da suka haifar da sabani a zamaninsu, wadanda daga baya suka shude; misali, yaduwar Hadisai sosai ya sa ba zai yiwu kowane Sahabi ya san su duka ba, don haka dole ne a yanke hukunci ba daidai ba inda bayanai suka yi karanci. A fili yake, ba za a zarge su ba saboda wadannan da makamantan kuskuren, wadanda ba da gangan suka yi ba.

The differences of opinion which occured among the Sahaabah were for the most part natural and unavoidable. A large portion of it was due to their different reasoning abilities which showed up in their various interpretations of Qur’anic verses and Hadeeths. There were other causes which led to differences during their time which later disappeared; for example, the wide distribution of Hadeeths made it impossible for any individual Sahabee to be aware of them all, and thus wrong dicisions were bound to be made where information was lacking. Obviously, they cannot be blamed for these and similar mistakes, which were not intentional.

Furthermore, it is clear that they readily corrected their wrong decisions when authentic information or more relevant evidence indicated that this should be done. It is this willingness to cast aside wrong decisions in the search for truth which excludes these conflicting rulings from the category of accursed disagreements. In this connection, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had said, “If a judge strives his utmost and makes a correct ruling, he receives two rewards, but if he strives and errs he still receives one.”237 Based on this Hadeeth, the Sahaabah are considered absolved from blame for conflicting rulings. However, any discrepancies apparent in their different rulings are not to be glorified and perpetuated. In fact they themselves disliked disagreements, as is shown in the following narration quoted by ash-Shaafi’ee’s student, al-Muzanee: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, the second Righteous Caliph, got angry because of a dispute between the Sahaabee, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, and another Sahaabee, Ibn Mas’ood, over the performance of Salaah in a single piece of cloth. Ubayy considered it quite alright while Ibn Mas’ood felt that was so only when cloth was scarce. ‘Umar angrily left his residence and declared, “Have two of Allaah’s Messenger’s companions disagreed and they are among those whom the masses watch closely and imitate? Ubayy is correct and Ibn Mas’ood should desist! If I hear of anyone disputing about this matter after this point, I will deal with him.”238

Furthermore, it is clear that they readily corrected their wrong decisions when authentic information or more relevant evidence indicated that this should be done. It is this willingness to cast aside wrong decisions in the search for truth which excludes these conflicting rulings from the category of accursed disagreements. In this connection, the messenger of Allaah (s.w.) had said, “If a judge strives his utmost and makes a correct ruling, he receives two rewards, but if he strives and errs he still receives one.”237 Based on this Hadeeth, the Sahaabah are considered absolved from blame for conflicting rulings. However, any discrepencies apparent in their differnt rulings are not to be glorified and perpetuated. In fact they themselves disliked disagreements, as is shown in the following narration quoted by ash-Shaafi’ee’s student, al-Muzanee: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, the second Righteous Caliph, got angry because of a dispute between the Sahaabee, ubayy ibn Ka’b, and another Sahaabee, Ibn Mas’ood, wver the performance of Salaah in a single piece of cloth. Ubayy considered in quite alright while Ibn Mas’ood felt that was so only when cloth was scarce. ‘Umar angrily left his residence and declared, “Have two of Allaah’s messenger’s companions disagreed and they are among those whom the masses watch closely and imitate? Ubayy is correct and Ibn Mas’ood should desist! If I hear of anyone disputing about this matter after this point, I will deal with him.”238

Hakika, malamai na farko sun san musabbabin bambance-bambancen da ke tsakanin Sahabbai da kuma yadda mutane ke son ci gaba da su. Saboda haka, sun yi bayanai masu ƙarfi a kan wannan muhimmin batu, domin su hana tsattsauran ra'ayi da rarrabuwar kai bisa hukunce-hukuncen Sahabbai da suka saɓa wa juna. Ga wasu misalan maganganunsu a kan wannan muhimmin batu. Ibn al-Qaasim, wanda yana cikin manyan almajiran Imam Maalik, ya ce: "Na ji Maalik da al-Layth duka suna cewa game da bambance-bambancen da ke tsakanin Sahabbai: 'Mutane suna cewa akwai sassauci a cikinsa, amma ba haka yake ba; lamari ne na hukunce-hukunce marasa daidai da daidai.'"239

Indeed, the early scholars well aware of the causes of differences among the Sahaabah and the tendency for people to want to perpetuate them. Accordingly, they made definitive statements on the matter in an effort to stave off dogmatism and sectarianism based on conflicting rulings of the Sahaabah. The following are a few examples of their statements on this vital subject. Ibn al-Qaasim, who was among the main students of Imaam Maalik, said, “I heard Maalik and al-Layth both say the following concerning the differences among the Sahaabah: ‘People say there is leeway for them in it, but it is not so; it was a case of wrong and right rulings’”.239

Ash-hab, wani ɗalibin Imam Malik, ya ce: "An taɓa tambayar Malik ko mutum yana cikin aminci ya bi hukuncin da aka danganta shi da shi ta hanyar ma'abota riwaya amintattu waɗanda suka ji shi daga sahabbai na Manzon Allah ﷺ. Sai ya amsa: 'A'a, na rantse da Allah, sai dai idan ya inganta.'"

Ash-hab, another of Imaam maalik’s students, said, “Maalik was once asked whether one was safe to follow a ruling related to him by reliable narrators who had heard it from companions of the Prophet (s.w.). He replied, ‘No, by Allaah, not unless it is correct:

Haqīqa ɗaya ce kawai. Shin mazhabobi biyu masu sabani za su iya zama dukkansu daidai a lokaci guda? Ra'ayin da yake daidai guda ɗaya ne kawai.’”240 Ɗalibin Imam ash-Shafi'i, al-Muzani, ya faɗi haka: “Sahabban Manzon Allah ﷺ sun yi sabani a lokuta daban-daban, kowannensu ya ayyana ɗayan a matsayin mai kuskure. Wasu daga cikinsu sun duba maganganun wasu, suka bincika su sosai. Don haka, da dukansu suna ganin abin da suka faɗa daidai ne, da ba za su bincika maganganun juna ba, ko su ayyana juna a matsayin masu kuskure.” Al-Muzani ya ƙara da cewa: “Ya kamata a yi wannan tambaya ga wanda ya halatta sabani, yana mai iƙirarin cewa idan malamai biyu suka yi ijtihadi a kan lamari guda, ɗayansu ya hukunta da cewa halal ne ɗayan kuma ya ce haram ne, dukansu daidai ne. ‘Shin hukuncinka ya dogara ne da nassi na asali (Alkur'ani ko Sunna) ko kuwa da qiyās (kwatanta)?’ Idan ya ce da qiyās ne, sai a tambaye shi: ‘Ta yaya nassi na asali zai ƙi jayayya, sannan kai kuma ka kafa dalili daga gare shi cewa jayayya halal ce?’ Ba wani mutum mai hankali da zai halatta hakan, balle malami.”241

the truth is only one. Can two opposing ominions be simultaneously correct? The opinion which is correct can be only one.’”240 Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee’s student, al-Muzanee, put it this way, “The companions of Allaah’s Messenger (s.w.) disagreed from time to time and declared each other mistaken. Some of them examined the statements of others and researched them thoroughly. Therefore, if all of them felt that whatever they said was correct, they would never have investigated each other’s statements or declared each other mistaken.” Al-Muzanee also said, “The following question should be put to the one who allows disagreement, claiming that if two scholars strive to strive at a decision concerningthe same incident on eruling that it is “Halaal” and the other that it is “Haraam”, both are correct. ‘Are you basing that judgement on a fundamental text (the Qur’aan or the Sunnah) or on Qiyaas (analogical deduction)?’ If the claims that it is by Qiyaas, he should be asked, ‘How could the fundamental text reject dispute and you in turn deduce from it that ispute is allowded?’ No common person capable of reason would allow that, much less a scholar.”241

Duk da cewa Sahabbai sun sha bambanta wajen aiwatar da wasu ka'idoji, sun kan yi iya bakin ƙoƙarinsu wajen kiyaye kamannin haɗin kai da kuma guje wa abubuwan da za su raba safunsu. Sai dai a tsakanin malamai da tabi'ai na baya waɗanda suka manne wa mazhabobin da aka gada ba tare da tunani ba, sai ga shi kuwa sabanin hakan ne muke gani. Kamar yadda aka ambata a baya, bambancin ra'ayinsu a wani lokaci ya kai ga rarrabuwar safunsu game da Salla (sallah ta farilla), wadda ita ce ginshiƙi mafi girma a Musulunci bayan shaidu biyu na imani.

Although the Sahaabah differed in the application of some principles, they used to go to extremes to preserve an appearance of unity and avoid things which would divide their ranks. But, among later scholars and followers who blindly and dogmatically clung to the inherited Madh-habs, we find the complete opposite. As was previously mentioned, their differenes at one point led to the splitting of their rands over Salaah (formal prayer), the greatest pillar of Islaam after the two testimonies of belief.

Ulama masu tsattsauran ra daga cikin malamai na baya wani lokaci sun yi nisa fiye da wannan matsananciyar hanya, har suka yanke hukunce-hukuncen da suka taba ginshiƙin 'yan'uwantaka da hadin kan Musulunci. Misali, Imam Abu Haneefah shi kaɗai daga cikin Imamai na farko yana ganin cewa Eemaan (imani) ba ya raguwa ba ya karuwa; mutum ko dai ya yi imani ko ya kafirta.242 Bisa ga ra'ayin Abu Haneefah, malamai na baya na Madh-hab suka yanke hukunci cewa idan aka tambayi mutum, "Kai mumini ne?" to haramun ne ya amsa da cewa, "Ni mumini ne, idan Allah ya so," domin hakan na nuna cewa yana shakka game da kasancewar imaninsa.243 Bisa ga Ijmaa'in malamai, shakka game da imani daidai take da kafirci (Kufr). Saboda haka, ya kamata mutum ya amsa da cewa, "Lallai ni mumini ne".244 Ma'anar da ba a fada ba amma take cikin wannan hukunci ita ce cewa mabiya sauran makarantun tunani suna shakka game da imaninsu, don haka suna cikin kafirci. Makarantar Hanafiyya ta farko ba ta taba fadin hakan ba, amma wasu malamai na baya sun fitar da hukuncin cewa mabiya Madh-hab na Hanafiyya an hana su auren mabiya Madh-hab na Shaafi'iyya, wanda a lokacin shi ne Madh-hab na biyu mafi shahara. Malamai na Madh-hab Hanafiyya daga baya sun soke wannan fitar da hukunci,245 amma ya kasance shaida ta tarihi da ke nuna hatsarorin sectarianism (rarrabuwar kai bisa akida).

Conservative sectarians among later scholars at times carried their differnces even beyond that extreme, making rulings which struck at the very heart of the brotherhood and unity of Islaam. For example, Imaam Abu Haneefah alone among the early Imaams felt that Eemaan (belief) neither decreased nor increased; one eiter believed or he disbelieved.242 On the basis of Abu Haneefah’s opinion, a ruling was made by later scholars of the Madh-hab stating that if one is asked the question, “Are you a believer?” It is Haraam to reply, “I am a believer, if Allaah so wills it,” as it implied that one is in doubt about the existence of his belief.243 According to the Ijmaa’ of the scholars, doubt about one’s belief is equivalent to disbelief (Kufr). Therefore, one should reply, “I am truly a believer”.244 The implied but unstated meaning of this ruling was that the followers of the other schools of thought were in doubt about their Eemaan and thus in disbelief. This was never state dby early Hanafee school, but some later scholars deduced from it the ruling that followers of the Hanafee Madh-hab were prohibited from marrying followers of the Shaafi’ee Madh-hab Which was the second most prominent Madh-hab at that time. This deductin was later over-ruled by scholars of the Hannafee Madh-hab,245 but stands as historical evidence documenting the dangers of sectarianism.

1. Matsayin mafi yawan Musulmai shi ne cewa mazhabobi huɗu ba su yin kuskure, kowa dole ne ya bi ɗaya daga cikinsu, kuma masu bi ba sa canza mazhaba ko ɗaukar hukunce-hukunce daga wasu mazhabobi.246

1. The position of the generality of Muslims is that the four Madhhabs are infallible, everyone must follow one of them and followers must not change Madh-habs or pick rulings from other Madh-habs.246

2. Wanda ba ya yarda da rashin kuskuren mazhabobi ko kuma ba ya bin ɗaya daga cikin mazhabobi huɗu ba, sau da yawa ana ɗaukar sa a matsayin mai bidi'a ba daidai ba, kuma ana kiransa da suna "Wahhabi" ko "Ahl-i-Hadeeth" ba daidai ba.

2. One who does not subscribe to the infallibility of the Madh-habs or does not follow any of the four Madh-habs is commonly, but mistakenly classified as a heretic and mislabelled either “Wahhabi” or “Ahl-i-Hadeeth”.

3. Hadisan da ake amfani da su wajen kare fanatancin mazhaba an ko dai an fassara su ba daidai ba, ko kuma ba su da inganci.

3. The Hadeeths used to defend Madh-hab sectarianism are either misinterpreted or unauthentic.

4. Alkur'ani ya yi Allah-wadai, a fili da kuma a kaikaice, da rikici da sabani a tsakanin Musulmi.

4. The Qur’aan explicity and implicity condemns conflict and dispute among Muslims.

5. Bambancin da ke tsakanin Sahabbai ya samo asali ne daga banbancin iyawarsu wajen fahimtar nassi da kuma yadda suka kasance suna samun labarin hadisan Annabi ﷺ. Hukuncinsu daban-daban ba su manne da su ba tamkar an daure musu kai idan an gabatar musu da hujja mai sabanin haka.

5. Differences among the Sahaabah were due to varying interpretational abilities and the extent to which they were exposed to Hadeeths of the Prophet (s.w.). Their different rulings were not rigidly clung to in the face of evedence to the contrary.

6. Malamai na farko sun jaddada cewa hukunce-hukuncen Sahabbai kawai waɗanda aka tabbatar suna daidai a ƙarshe ne ake bi a matsayin daidai.

6. Early scholars emphasized the fact that only those rulings of the Sahaabah, which were proven to be correct in the long run were to be followed as correct.

7. Sabani tsakanin Sahabbai bai taba kai su ga rarrabuwa da rabuwar kai a tsakaninsu ba, sabanin haka, a tsakanin malaman Madhhabi na baya, sabani ya koma rashin jituwa tsakanin Musulmi.

7. Disagreements among the Sahaabah never led to disunity and division amongst them, whereas, among later scholars of the Madh-hab, differences evolved into disharmony among Muslims.