A cikin babukan da suka gabata mun bi diddigin ci gaban tarihi na Fiqhu da Madhhabobi, muna nuna alakarsu da juna da gudummawarsu ga fahimtar Musulunci gabaki ɗaya da kuma na musamman kamar yadda aka saukar da shi a cikin Alƙur'ani da Sunnah. Ya kamata a lura cewa Fiqhu (dokar Musulunci) da Madhhabobi (makarantun tunanin Musulunci) sun kasance kuma suna da muhimmanci a matsayin ƙari da ke cika saƙonnin wahayi na Allah, waɗanda ke ayyana ƙa'idodin asali da ke tafiyar da haƙƙoƙi da nauyin da ke kan mutum a dangantakarsa da Allah da kuma da abokin zamantakewarsa. Ta hanyar aikace-aikacen takamaimai na fassarorin Alƙur'ani da Sunnah ne ake iya bayyana nufin Allah ga mutum a cikin lokaci da kuma wuri. Da baiwar hankali da Allah ya ba shi, mutum (musamman malaman Musulunci) zai iya bayar da fassarori masu dacewa na abin gabaɗaya don biyan buƙatun abin musamman: daga nan ne muhimmancin Madhhabi (ƙungiyar malaman Musulunci) da Fiqhu (jimillar dokokin Musulunci tare da ƙa'idodin fitar da waɗannan dokoki) ke fitowa. A nan ne ainihin muhimmancin Fiqhu da Madhhabi a cikin Musulunci yake.

In the preceding chapters we have traced the historical development of Fiqh and the Madh-habs, showing their interrelationship and their contribution to a general, as well as specific, understanding of Islaam as revealed in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. It should be noted that both Fiqh (Islamic law) and the Madh-habs (schools of Islamic thought) were and are necessary additions complementing the divine revelations which define the basic principles giverning man’s rights and responsibilities in his relationships with Allaah and his fellow man. It is through specific applications of the interpretations of the Qur’aan and the Sunnah that Allaah’s divine will can be made manifest to man over time and through space. With God-given intellectual powers man (specifically Islamic scholars) can provide relevant interpretations of the general to meet the particular: thence relevance of the Madh-hab (the circle of Islamic scholars) and Fiqh (the body of Islamic laws together with principles for deducing these laws). Herein lies the true importance of Fiqh and the Madh-hab in Islaam.

Yanzu, tunda Musulunci addini ne da Allah Ya shar'anta wa dukkan mutane a kowane zamani da kowace ƙasa, sai aka bai wa malamai a yankuna da zamani dabam-dabam aikin ƙirƙiro ƙa'idojin Fiqh da takamaiman hukunce-hukuncen Fiqh domin warware sababbin matsaloli da suka taso. Daidaiton fassarar kowane malami ya dogara ne da ƙarfin basirarsa ta asali da kuma irin da yawan hujjojin da yake da su a lokacin yanke hukunci. Wasu sun fuskanci ƙarin matsala ta bambancin al'adu, kuma da yawa sun rasa taimakon da za a samu daga tuntuɓar juna, saboda nisan da ke tsakaninsu da abokan aikinsu da kuma wahalar sadarwa. Saboda haka ne aka samu bambancin ra'ayi daga yanki zuwa yanki. Duk da cikas iri-iri, malaman farko sun sauke nauyin da ke kansu ga Musulunci da ga 'yan'uwansu mutane, ta hanyar amfani da ikon hankali da Allah Ya ba su wajen fassara manufofin Allah ga mutane. Suna zaune a sassa dabam-dabam na jihar Musulunci, sai suka zama wadanda suka kafa makarantun tunani na Musulunci dabam-dabam, wannan ya sa mazhabobi suka yawaita a wani mataki na ci gaban shari'ar Musulunci da jihar Musulunci. Saboda haka, a tarihi, bayyanar fiye da mazhaba ɗaya babu makawa ce. Haka kuma, yayin da yawan mazhabobi ya karu, sadarwa da sauran abubuwa suka yi tasiri, bambance-bambance da sabanin ra'ayi sun zama abin da ke faruwa a zahiri. Duk da haka, muddin malamai sun riƙe gaskiya a gaba a zukatansu kuma ba a jagorance su ba zuwa ga ɓangaranci, fanaticism, ko sha'awar daukaka da lada ta kashin kai, ruhin Musulunci na asali ya kasance a cikin mazhabobinsu. A irin wannan yanayi, malamai ba su taba jinkirin watsi da ra'ayoyinsu na kashin kansu ba don goyon bayan hukunce-hukuncen wasu waɗanda aka bayyana a fili cewa sun fi kusa da ma'anar da aka nufa wadda ake fahimta daga Alƙur'ani da Sunnah. A cikin wasu kalmomin, an ci gaba da neman gaskiya har zuwa lokacin da abubuwan nan marasa kyau da aka ambata a baya (fitina tsakanin mazhabobi da kwadayin daukaka ta kai) suka fara mamaye rayuwar wasu malamai. To, a lokacin ne kuma binne-binne wajen bin mazhaba ba tare da hujja ba (Taqleed) tare da hana Ijtihaad suka haifar da yaduwar fitina tsakanin mazhabobi a tsakanin talakawa, da kuma raguwar neman gaskiya a tsakanin malamai da dama.

Now since Islaam is a religion divinely ordained for all men at all times and in all climes, it was given to scholars in different regions and times to evolve principles of Fiqh as well as specific laws of Fiqh in order to resolve various new issues as they arose. The correctness of their interpretations was proportional to their innate capabilities and to the type and quantity of evidence available to them at the time of making rulings. Some were faced with the additional factor of cultural differences, and many were deprived of the assistance to be gained from mural consultation, owing to their distance from their colleagues and the consequent difficulties of communication. Hence the differences of opinion that arose from region to region. Despite various handicaps, the early scholars discharged their duties to Islaam and to their fellowmen by using their God-given powers of intellect to interpret Allaah’s purposes for men. Situated in different parts of the Muslim state, they became the founders of different schools of Islamic thought, hence the multiplication of Madh-habs at one stage in the evolution of the Islamic law and the Muslim state. Historically, therefore, the appearance of more than one Madh-hab was inevitable. Furthermore, as the numbers of Madh-habs increased and communication and other factors exercised their influence, difference and contradictions, too, were a natural outcome. However, so long as scholars managed to keep the goal to truth foremost in mind and were not led astray by sectarianism, fanaticism, or a desire for personal glory and reward, the essential spirit of Islaam was preserved in their Madh-habs. In such circumstances, scholars were in no way reluctant to abandon their individual opinions in favor of rulings by others which were clearly shown to be nearer the intended meaning deducible from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. In others words, there was a continuing search for truth up until such time as the negative factors previously mentioned (sectarianism and desire for personal glory) became dominant in the lives of some of the scholars. Then, indeed, blind following of Madh-hab (Taqleed) coupled with the ban on Ijtihaad led to the widespread promotion of sectarianism among the masses and the general decline in the search for truth among many scholars.

Bayan haka, madhhabai huɗu da suka rage, tare da hukunce-hukuncensu daban-daban kuma wani lokacin masu karo da juna, sun ɗauki halin rashin kuskure, kuma hadisai na ƙarya suka bayyana don ƙarfafa wannan hali na anti-Islamic. Don mayar da martani ga wannan koma-baya, ƙungiyoyin gyara daban-daban a cikin zamuna sun yi kira da a haɗa madhhabai, ko kuma, a wasu lokuta, a ƙi buƙatar kowane madhhab. Matsayin farko halastacce ne, kamar yadda muka nuna; na ƙarshe kuwa matsanancin ra'ayi ne, wataƙila bidi'a ce, domin yana watsi da muhimmancin wata makarantar tunanin Musulunci guda ɗaya a matsayin cikakken goyon baya ga Alƙur'ani da Sunnah, don kyakkyawar fahimta da godiya ga dokokin Allah (SWT).

Thereafter, the four survining Madh-habs, with their different and sometimes contradictory rulings, assumed the character of infallibility, and spurious Hadeeths arose to bolster this anti-Islamic trait. As a counter to this decline, various reform movements through the ages have called for a unification of the Madh-habs or, in some cases, rejection of the need for any Madh-hab. The former position is a legitimate one, as we have shown; the latter is an extremist one, possibly heretical since it overlooks the importance of a unified school of Islamic thought as a necessary complement to the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, for a better understanding and appreciation of Allaah’s divine laws.

Daga tarihin ci gaban Fiqhu da juyin Madhhabai da aka bayyana a cikin surori da suka gabata, mun ga cewa akwai wani lokaci da bambance-bambancen dabi'a tsakanin Madhhabai daban-daban suka yi girma sosai har suka kai ga bangaranci, har ma malaman wancan zamani suka watsar da Ijtihadi, suka sanya wa jama'ar Musulmi bin makafi (Taqlid) ga ɗaya daga cikin manyan Madhhabai huɗu. Duk da haka, Imamai da aka danganta Madhhabai huɗun zuwa gare su, su da kansu sun yi adawa sosai da kafa waɗannan bambance-bambancen, kuma sun yi yaƙi da Taqlid sosai, ko a tsakanin mabiyansu ko a tsakanin jama'a gaba ɗaya. Amma har yau, mutane da yawa suna jin cewa idan aka watsar da Hadisi ingantacce, to hakan zai zama bayyana cewa Imamin Madhhabinsu ya yi kuskure a hukuncinsa, wanda a ganinsu wannan rashin girmamawa ne kusa da kafirci. Ba su gane cewa fifita ra'ayin Imamin nasu a kan maganar Annabi ﷺ da kansa, yana adawa da matsayin da Imamin nasu ya ɗauka, kuma hakan yana kusantar wani nau'in Shirki da ake kira "Shirk fee Tawheed al-Ittiba'", wato raba biyayya ba tare da tambaya ba, wadda ta tabbata ga Annabi ﷺ kaɗai. Domin a cikin shaidar Musulunci (babu abin bautawa face Allah, Muhammadu manzon Allah ne), ana karɓar Annabi ﷺ a matsayin mutum kaɗai da ya kamata a bi shi ba tare da tambaya ba, tun da bin sa daidai yake da bin Allah.

From the historical development of Fiqh and the evolution of the Madh-habs described in the preceding chapters, we have seen that there was a period during which natural differences among the various Madh-habs became extremely exaggerated to the point of sectarianism, so much so that scholars of that time discarded Ijtihaad and imposed upon the generality of Muslims the blind following (Taqleed) of one of the four major Madh-habs. However, the Imaams to whom the four schools are attributed were themselves totally against the enthronement of these differences and fought vehemently against Taqleed either among their own followers or among the masses in general. Yet, till today, many people feel that if an authentic Hadeeth should be discarded because, accepting it would mean declaring that the Imaam of one’s Madh-hab was mistaken in his ruling which, in their opinion is an act of disrespect akin to blasphemy. Little do they realize that their preference of their Imaam’s opinion over the Prophet’s (s.w.) statement is itself in total opposition to the stand taken by their own Imaam, and is in fact bordering on a form of Shirk198 known as “Shirk fee Tawheed alIttibaa‘”, that is sharing the unquestioned following which belongs only to the Prophet (s.w.). For in the declaration of one’s Islaam (there is no god but Allaah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allaah), the Prophet (s.w.) is accepted as being the only person who should be followed unquestioningly, since following him is equivalent to following Allaah.

Tun da yawancin Musulmi a yau ba su san cewa akwai saɓani tsakanin matsayin malaman farko, wato Imamai, da madhhabinsu kamar yadda yake a yau ba, ya dace a duba sosai matsayin da Imamai da ɗalibansu suka ɗauka game da taqlid, kamar yadda yake bayyana a maganganunsu na asali.

As most Muslims today are unaware of the contradiction between the position of the early Imaams hand that of their Madhhab is it exists today, it is appropriate there to take a closer look at the stand taken by the early Imaams and their students towards Taqleed as revealed in their actual statements.