Katika sura zilizotangulia mwandishi amejitahidi kufuatilia na kueleza maendeleo ya kihistoria ya Madh-habu, shule za fikra za kisheria za Kiislamu, pamoja na mchango wake kwa ujumla katika kuiboresha Fiqh kwa hatua na katika tabia yake ya kuwaunganisha Waislamu. Imeonyeshwa kwa kutosha kwamba fikra huru zilizowatambulisha Maimamu wa mwanzo na Madh-habu zao, tangu wakati wa Mtume ﷺ na kupitia karne zilizofuata, zimebadilishwa polepole na ugumu fulani na msimamo usiobadilika. Tangu mwishoni mwa karne ya kumi na tatu, madh-habu si tu zimekuwa chanzo cha mgawanyiko wa kimadhehebu, bali pia Fiqh imepoteza uhai wake wa awali uliokuwa umejikita katika kanuni ya Ijtihaad, na hivyo haijaweza kuendana na mabadiliko ya hali. Kutokana na mgawanyiko wa kimadhehebu na ukakamavu wa Fiqh, usafi, umoja na nguvu ya kuendelea kwa Uislamu, kama ulivyorithiwa tangu zamani, vimetishiwa katika dunia nzima ya Kiislamu.

In the preceding chapters the writer has endeavored to trace and account for the historical development of Madh-habs, schools of Islamic legal thought, and to show their overall contributions to the progressive enrichment and unifying character of Fiqh within the Muslim world. It has been amply demonstrated that the liberal thinking which characterized the early Imaams and their Madh-habs, from the time of the Prophet (s.w.) down through the ages, has been staidly replaced by a certain rigidity and dogmatism. Since the late thirteenth century, not only have the madh-habs become spawning grounds of sectarianism, but Fiqh has lost its original vitality which was enshrined in the principle of Ijtihaad and thus it has not been able to keep pace with changing circumstances. As a result of Madhhab sectarianism and Fiqh inflexibility, the traditional purity, unity and dynamism of Islaam have been threatened throughout the Muslim world.

Katika sura hii ya mwisho mwandishi atachunguza jambo la tofauti za maoni na kutokubaliana (Ikhtilaaf) kwa kuzingatia misimamo ya wanazuoni wa mwanzo na wanafunzi wao. Pia atajitahidi kuthibitisha kwamba ingawa tofauti za maoni haziepukiki, kutokubaliana kusiko na hoja pamoja na mifarakano hakuna nafasi katika dini ya Uislamu ambayo Allah, kwa hekima yake, aliiteremsha kwa Mtume wake ﷺ.

In this final chapter the writer will examine the phenomenon of differences and disagreement (Ikhtilaaf) in the light of the positions of early scholars and their students. He will also endeavor to reinforce the fact that while differences of opinion are inevitable, unreasoning disagreement and sectarianism have no place in the religion of Islaam which Allaah in His wisdom revealed to His Prophet (s.w.).

Katika kuchunguza maendeleo ya kihistoria (na mabadiliko) ya Madh-habs na ukuaji sambamba wa Fiqh kuwa taaluma kamili ya Kiislamu, tumeona kwamba maimamu wakuu na waasisi wa Madh-habs kwa ujumla walichukua msimamo kwamba:

In treating the historical development (and evolution) of the Madh-habs and the concurrent growth of Fiqh into a full-fledged Islamic science, we have seen that the great Imaams and founders of the Madh-habs generally adopted the stand that:

(a) Madhehebu moja moja au zote kwa pamoja hazikuwa zisizo na makosa, na (b) kufuata madhehebu yoyote kati ya hayo hakukuwa wajibu kwa Waislamu.

(a) Madh-habs singly or in their totality were not infallible and (b) The following of any one Madh-hab was not obligatory for Muslims.

Hata hivyo, athari kubwa ya taqlid imesababisha, miongoni mwa mambo mengine, mageuzi kamili ya mtazamo, kiasi kwamba kwa karne nyingi sasa msimamo wa Waislamu wengi ni kwamba Madhhab nne zimeamriwa na Mwenyezi Mungu, na hivyo ni zisizo na makosa; hukumu za kisheria za kila moja ya Madhhab hizo ni sahihi na za kweli; kila mtu lazima afuate mojawapo ya Madhhab nne; Muislamu hapaswi kubadilisha Madhhab yake; na ni makosa kuchagua hukumu kutoka Madhhab mbalimbali. Kama matokeo ya imani hizi, imeelezwa kwamba yeyote anayethubutu kukataa waziwazi kutokuwa na makosa kwa Madhhab zote nne au wajibu wa kufuata mojawapo ya Madhhab hizi, anachukuliwa kuwa mzushi aliyelaaniwa na mtoka dini.

Yet the pervasive influence of Taqleed has resulted, among other things, in a complete turnabout, so much so, that for centuries now the position taken by the generality of Muslims is that the four Madh-habs are divinely ordained the therefore infallible; the legal rulings of each of those Madh-habs are all sound and correct; everyone must follow one of the four Madh-habs; a Muslim should not change his or her Madh-hab; and it is wrong to pick and choose rulings across Madh-habs. As a corollary to these beliefs, it has been state that anyone who dares openly to deny the infallibility of all four Madh-habs or the obligation to follow one to these Madh-habs is considered an accursed innovator and apostate.

Katika karne ya ishirini, lakabu lililotumiwa zaidi kumtaja mtu wa namna hiyo aliyeacha Uislamu ni jina la Wahhabi (linalotamkwa Wahhaabee). Neno jingine lenye matusi kama hayo, linalotumiwa hasa nchini India na Pakistan, ni Ahl-i-Hadeeth. Kwa njia, maneno haya mawili kwa kweli ni majina yasiyo sahihi, kama maelezo yafuatayo yataonyesha.

In the 20th century the most commonly used epithet for describing such an apostate has been the label Wahhabi (pronounced Wahhaabee). Another similarly abusive term, which is used mostly in India and Pakistan, is Ahl-i-Hadeeth, Incidentally, both of these terms are in reality misnomers, as the following explanatory comments will reveal.

Mwaka 1924-25 wafuasi wa Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1787) kwa bidii waliharibu miundo yote iliyojengwa juu ya makaburi ya Sahaabah na watu wengine waliotukuzwa katika makaburi ya miji mitakatifu ya Makkah na Madeenah. Wale wanaoitwa Wahhabi pia walipinga Tawassul (kutafuta shafaa kwa wafu), ambayo ilikuwa imeenea kama desturi miongoni mwa umma wa Waislamu pamoja na wanazuoni wengi. Kwa kuwa Tawassul na kushikamana na makaburi na maqaam kulikuwa kumekita mizizi katika ulimwengu wa Kiislamu kwa muda mrefu, kitendo hicho cha uharibifu cha Wahhabi cha mwaka 1924-25

In the years 1924-25 the followers of Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhab (1703-1787) zealously all structures built over graves of the Sahaabah and other revered persons in the cemeteries of the holy cities of Makkah and Madeenah. The so called Wahhabis were also opposed to Tawassul (seeking intercession from the dead), which had become a widespread practice among the masses of Muslims as well as among many scholars. Since Tawassul and the attachment to monuments and shrines had long been ingrained in the Muslim world, the destructive act of the Wahhabis in 1924-25

…ilionekana kuwa ya kibunifu na yenye msimamo mkali kupita kiasi; kwa sababu hiyo, jina la utani Wahhabi likatumiwa kuwaita "wabunifu waliolaaniwa" na "mtoka dini." Hata hivyo, inapaswa kuzingatiwa kuwa Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab, mwanzilishi wa harakati ya Wahhabi, alifuata Fiqh ya Madh-hab ya Hambali, na wafuasi wake wa leo wanaendelea kufanya hivyo.

appeared to be innovative and extremist; hence the application of the epithet Wahhabi to “accursed innovators” and “apostate”. It should be noted, however, that ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab, founder of the Wahhabi movement, followed the Fiqh of the Hambalee Madh-hab and that his present-day followers continue to do so.

Zaidi zaidi, katika kupinga Tawassul na kubomoa makaburi na sehemu za kumbukumbu za watu waliokufa, wazao na wafuasi wa Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab wa karne ya ishirini walikuwa wakipinga desturi zilizo kinyume na Uislamu. Mtume ﷺ alikuwa ameamuru kubomolewa kwa masanamu na sanamu zote, na kusawazishwa kwa makaburi yote na ardhi inayoyazunguka, kwa mujibu wa Hadithi sahihi iliyopokewa na ‘Alee ibn Abee Taalib na kukusanywa na mwanazuoni mkubwa wa Hadithi Muslim ibn Hajjaj.222 Kutokana na yaliyotajwa hapo juu, sasa inapaswa kuwa wazi kwamba neno Wahhabi linalotumiwa kumaanisha "mzushi aliyelaaniwa" na "mtoka dini" ni kwa kweli jina lisilo sahihi.

Furthermore, in opposing Tawassul and destroying monuments and shrines to the dead, the twentieth-century descendants and followers of Ibn ‘Abdul-Wahhaab were attacking anti-Islamic practices. The prophet (s.w.) had ordered the demolition of all idols and statues, and the leveling of all tombs with the surrounding earth, according to and authentic Hadeeth reported by ‘Alee ib Abee Taalib and collected by the great Hadeeth scholar Muslim ibn Hajjaj.222 From the above it should now be clear that the word Wahhabi applied to mean “accursed innovator” and “apostate” is in fact a mislabel.

Vivyo hivyo, neno Ahl-i-Hadeeth (Kiar. Ahl al-Hadeeth) lilikuwa jina la heshima na sifa lililopewa wanazuoni wa zamani ambao, kama Imaam Maalik, walitumia muda mwingi na juhudi nyingi katika utafiti maalum wa Hadeeth. Kuelekea mwisho wa karne ya kumi na tisa, jina hili lilipitishwa na harakati ya mageuzi nchini India na Pakistan iliyodai kurejea kwenye Qur'aan na Hadeeth kama msingi wa Fiqh, na iliyopinga kufuata kwa msimamo mkali Madh-habs. Hata hivyo, ufanatiki na upendeleo wa kimadhehebu wa leo wa Madh-hab umepotosha maana ya neno Ahl-i-Hadeeth, na kulitumia kwa mtu anayepinga kwa ufanatiki kufuata yoyote kati ya Madh-habs.

Similarly, the term Ahl-i-Hadeeth (Ar. Ahl al-Hadeeth) was a title of respect and praise given to scholars in the past who like Imaam Maalik, devoted much time and effort to the specialized study of Hadeeth. Towards the end of the nineteenth century this title was adopted by a reform movement in India and Pakistan which called for a return to the Qur’aan and the Hadeeth as the basis of Fiqh and which opposed the dogmatic adherence to Madh-habs. However, present day Madh-hab fanaticism and sectarianism have distorted the meaning of the term Ahl-i-Hadeeth to apply to one who fanatically opposes the following of any of the Madh-habs.

Kwa kuzingatia ufahamu wetu wa mabadiliko ya kihistoria ya Madhhabu na maendeleo sambamba ya Fiqh, inashangaza kwamba wale waliopotoka kweli kutoka kwenye mafundisho ya Uislamu si wale wanaoitwa Wahhabi na Ahl-i-Hadeeth, bali ni watu wale wanaoshikilia kwa ukali kwamba kila Muislamu lazima afuate mojawapo ya Madhhabu nne, na kuamini kwa upofu kutokuwa na kosa kwa Madhhabu zote nne, licha ya kutofautiana waziwazi katika hukumu zao juu ya masuala ya sheria ya Kiislamu. Hata hivyo, ni lazima ikubaliwe kwamba wale wanaotetea Taqlid ya upofu mara nyingi ni wa dhati sana katika imani yao ya kutokuwa na kosa kwa Madhhabu zote nne. Zaidi ya hayo, wasomi wengi wamo katika safu zao. 223

The irony is that, in light of our insight into the historical evolution of the Madh-habs and concurrent development of Fiqh, the true deviants from the teachings of Islaam are not the so-called Wahhabi and Ahl-i-Hadeeth, but those people who would rigidly insist on every Muslim following one or another of the four Madhhabs and on their believing blindly in the infallibility of all four Madh-habs, despite certain glaring contradictions in their rulings on points of Islamic law. Yet it must be acknowledged that those who advocate blind following (Taqleed), are often very sincere in their belief in the infallibility of all four Madh-habs. Futhermore many scholars are included in their ranks. 223

Je, wale wanaosisitiza Taqleed wanapatanishaje tofauti na mikinzano inayojulikana kutoka Madh-hab moja hadi nyingine na imani yao juu ya kutokuwa na makosa kwa Madh-hab zote nne? Baadhi yao wanadai kuwa Madh-hab ziliwekwa na Mwenyezi Mungu, na kwamba Mtume ﷺ mwenyewe alitabiri kuja kwake. Mara nyingi, hata hivyo, wanategemea hoja yao zaidi juu ya ushahidi wa Hadithi zifuatazo:

How then do those who insist on Taqleed reconcile the known differnces and contradictions from Madh-hab to Madh-hab with their belief in the infallibility of all four Madh-habs? Some of them claim that the Madh-habs were divinely ordained and the Prophet (s.w.) himself prophesied their coming. Most often, however, they rest their case, mainly on the evidence of the following Hadeeths:

(a) “Tofauti za maoni miongoni mwa umma wangu ni rehema.” (b) “Tofauti zilizo kati ya Maswahaba wangu ni rehema kwenu.”224

(a) “Disagreement among my nation is mercy.” (b) “Differences among my Sahaabah are a mercy for you.”224

(c) "Masahaba wangu ni kama nyota. Mtaongozwa kwa yeyote kati yao mtakayemfuata."225

(c) “My Sahaabah are like stars. You will be guided by whichever of them you follow.”225

(d) "Hakika Maswahaba zangu ni kama nyota. Mtaongozwa na kauli yoyote ya kwao mtakayoichukua."226

(d) “Verily my Sahaabah are like stars. You will be guided by any statement of theirs you adopt.”226

(e) "Niliomba kwa Mola wangu kuhusu mambo ambayo masahaba wangu watatofautiana baada ya kifo changu, naye Allah akanifunulia: 'Ee Muhammad, hakika kwangu Mimi, masahaba wako ni kama nyota angani, baadhi yao wakiwa angavu zaidi kuliko wengine. Kwa hiyo, yeyote atakayefuata lolote ambalo wao (Sahaba) wametofautiana juu yake, kwa upande wangu, huyo atakuwa amefuata uongofu'."227

(e) “I asked my Lord about the things in which my companions will differ after my death and Allaah revealed to me: ‘Oh Muhammad, verily to Me, your companions are like stars in the sky, some brighter than others. Sohe who follwos anything over which they (the Sahaabah) have differed, as far as I am concerned, he will be following guidance’.”227

Hata hivyo, kabla hadithi hizi hazijakubalika kama ushahidi wa upotovu wa kimadhehebu, ni lazima ziwe zimethibitishwa wazi kuwa ni sahihi. Uchunguzi wa hadithi hizi umefanywa kweli na wanazuoni mashuhuri, na hitimisho lao limeandikwa hapa chini.

However, before these Hadeeths can be accepted as evidence for sectarianism, they must be clearly shown to be authentic. An examination of these Hadeeths has indeed been made by eminent scholars and their conclusions are recorded hereafter.

Kuhusu Hadithi ambazo inasemekana Mtume (s.w.) alitabiri kuja kwa Maimamu na Madhehebu yao, zile sahihi kwa ujumla zimetajwa kwa maneno ya jumla bila kutaja majina ya Maimamu wala Madhehebu yao, ilhali zile Hadithi zilizotajwa kwa maneno mahususi zote ni za kuzuliwa.228

As for the Hadeeths in which the Prophet (s.w.) was supposed to have foretold the coming of the Imaams and their Madhhabs, the authentic ones are all generally worded with no specific mention of either the names of the Imaams or their Madh-habs, while those Hadeeths that are specifically worded are all fabricated.228

Kuhusu "Hadithi" (a) hapo juu, haina mnyororo wa wapokezi unaoiunganisha na mtu yeyote, achilia mbali Mtume (s.w.); wala haipatikani katika kitabu chochote cha Hadithi.229 Kwa hiyo si sahihi hata kuitaja kuwa Hadithi, kwani imezuliwa. Kuhusu "Hadithi" (b) hadi (e) hapo juu, ingawa zinaweza kupatikana katika vitabu vya Hadithi au vinavyohusu Hadithi, zote zimethibitika kuwa si sahihi. La kwanza limeainishwa na wanazuoni wa Hadithi kuwa ni Waahin (dhaifu sana),230 na la pili na la tatu kuwa ni Mawdoo' (la kuzushwa).231

With regard to “Hadeeth” (a) above, it has no chain of narration connecting it to anyone, much less to the Prophet (s.w.); nor is it to be found in any of the books of Hadeeth.229 It is therefore incorrect ot even refer to is as a Hadeeth, as it is fabricated. With regard to “Hadeeths” (b) to (e) above, although they can be found in books of Hadeeth or about Hadeeth, they have all proven to be unauthentic. The first is classified by Hadeeth scholars as Waahin (extremely weak)230, the second and third as Mawdoo’ (fabricated)231

na la nne, akiita kuwa Baatil (batili).232 Hivyo basi, ushahidi wa Hadiithi kwa ajili ya kutukuza na kuendeleza tofauti kati ya Madh-habu, hauwezi kukubalika kabisa kwa mtazamo wa uhalisi wake.

and the fourth as Baatil (false).232 Thus, the Hadeeth evidence for the glorification and perpetuation of differences among Madh-habs, is totally unacceptable from the point of view of authenticity.

Si hadithi hizi tu si sahihi, bali maana zake pia zinapingana waziwazi na Qur-aan yenyewe. Katika sura zote mia moja na kumi na nne za Qur-aan, Allah amelaani waziwazi na kukataza mifarakano ya kidini, na ameamuru umoja na maelewano. Mifarakano imekatazwa waziwazi katika aya kama:

Not only are these so-called Hadeeths unauthentic, but their very meanings are in obvious conflict with the Qur’aan itself. Throughout the Qur’aan’s one hundred and fourteen chapters, Allaah has clearly cursed and forbidden religious desagreement and has ordered unity and agreement. Disagreement has been explicity forbidden in verses such as:

Ikiwa rehema ya Allah inakomesha mzozo kati ya watu kama inavyodokezwa hapo juu, basi mzozo na kutofautiana kunawezaje kuwa rehema? Kwa maneno yaliyo wazi kabisa ya aya ifuatayo na nyingine zinazofanana nayo, Allah ameamuru umoja na maelewano:

If Allaah’s mercy puts an end to dispute among men as is implied in the above, how then could disagreement and dispute be a mercy? In the unmistakable terms of the following verse and others like it, Allaah has ordered unity and agreement: