Katika sura zilizotangulia tumefuatilia maendeleo ya kihistoria ya Fiqh na Madh-habs, tukionyesha uhusiano wao na mchango wao katika kuelewa kwa ujumla na kwa undani Uislamu kama ulivyofunuliwa katika Qur-aan na Sunnah. Ni muhimu kutambua kwamba Fiqh (sheria ya Kiislamu) na Madh-habs (madhehebu ya mawazo ya Kiislamu) vilikuwa na bado ni nyongeza muhimu zinazokamilisha wahyi wa Mwenyezi Mungu, ambao unabainisha kanuni za msingi zinazotawala haki na wajibu wa binadamu katika mahusiano yake na Allaah na na wenzake. Ni kupitia matumizi mahsusi ya tafsiri za Qur-aan na Sunnah ndipo mapenzi ya Allaah yanaweza kudhihirika kwa binadamu kwa muda na mahali. Kwa uwezo wa akili aliopewa na Mungu, binadamu (hasa wanachuoni wa Kiislamu) anaweza kutoa tafsiri zinazofaa za jumla ili kukidhi mahitaji mahsusi: hapo ndipo umuhimu wa Madh-hab (kundi la wanachuoni wa Kiislamu) na Fiqh (mkusanyiko wa sheria za Kiislamu pamoja na kanuni za kuzitoa sheria hizi) unapojitokeza. Hapa ndipo ulipo umuhimu halisi wa Fiqh na Madh-hab katika Uislamu.

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.

Kwa kuwa Uislamu ni dini iliyoteremshwa na Mwenyezi Mungu kwa ajili ya watu wote, katika kila zama na kila mahali, ilitolewa kwa wanazuoni katika maeneo na nyakati mbalimbali ili waandae kanuni za Fiqh pamoja na sheria mahsusi za Fiqh, ili kutatua masuala mapya yaliyojitokeza kadiri yalivyotokea. Usahihi wa tafsiri zao ulilingana na uwezo wao wa asili na aina na wingi wa dalili zilizokuwepo kwao wakati wa kutoa hukumu. Baadhi yao walikabiliwa na jambo la ziada la tofauti za kitamaduni, na wengi walinyimwa msaada unaopatikana kupitia kushauriana baina yao, kutokana na umbali wao kutoka kwa wenzao na matatizo yaliyotokana na mawasiliano. Hivyo ndivyo zilivyozuka tofauti za kimaoni kutoka eneo moja hadi jingine. Licha ya vikwazo mbalimbali, wanazuoni wa mwanzo walitekeleza wajibu wao kwa Uislamu na kwa wanadamu wenzao kwa kutumia uwezo wa akili aliojaliwa na Mwenyezi Mungu ili kufasiri malengo ya Allaah kwa watu. Wakiwa wametawanyika katika sehemu mbalimbali za dola ya Kiislamu, wakawa waasisi wa madhehebu tofauti za fikra za Kiislamu, na hivyo kuongezeka kwa Madh-habs katika hatua fulani ya maendeleo ya sheria ya Kiislamu na dola ya Kiislamu. Kihistoria, basi, kuibuka kwa zaidi ya Madh-hab moja kulikuwa jambo lisiloepukika. Zaidi ya hayo, kadiri idadi ya Madh-habs ilivyoongezeka na mawasiliano pamoja na mambo mengine yalipoathiri, tofauti na mikinzano pia zikawa matokeo ya kawaida. Hata hivyo, mradi wanazuoni walifanikiwa kuweka lengo la kutafuta haki mbele kabisa katika akili zao, na wasipotoshwe na upendeleo wa kimadhehebu, fanaka, au tamaa ya utukufu na thawabu binafsi, roho halisi ya Uislamu ilihifadhiwa katika Madh-habs zao. Katika hali kama hizo, wanazuoni hawakusita hata kidogo kuachana na maoni yao binafsi kwa kupendelea hukumu za wengine ambazo zilionyeshwa wazi kuwa karibu zaidi na maana iliyokusudiwa inayopatikana kutoka katika Qur'aan na Sunnah. Kwa maneno mengine, kulikuwa na utafutaji endelevu wa ukweli hadi wakati ambapo mambo hasi yaliyotajwa awali (ubaguzi wa kimadhehebu na tamaa ya utukufu binafsi) yalipoanza kutawala maisha ya baadhi ya wanazuoni. Hapo ndipo, kwa hakika, kufuata kwa upofu madhehebu (Taqleed) pamoja na katazo la Ijtihaad kulipelekea kuenea kwa ubaguzi wa kimadhehebu miongoni mwa umma na kupungua kwa jumla kwa utafutaji wa ukweli miongoni mwa wanazuoni wengi.

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.

Baadaye, Madh-hab nne zilizobaki, pamoja na hukumu zao tofauti na wakati mwingine zinazopingana, zilianza kuchukuliwa kana kwamba hazina makosa, na hadithi za uongo zikaibuka ili kuimarisha tabia hii ya kupinga Uislamu. Kama kupinga kudorora huku, harakati mbalimbali za mageuzi katika zama zote zimetaka Madh-hab ziunganishwe au, katika baadhi ya hali, zikataliwe kabisa kwamba ni lazima kufuata Madh-hab yoyote. Msimamo wa kwanza ni wa halali, kama tulivyoonyesha; wa pili ni wa msimamo mkali, na huenda ukawa ni uzushi, kwani unapuuza umuhimu wa shule moja iliyounganika ya fikra za Kiislamu kama nyongeza ya lazima ya Qur-aan na Sunnah, kwa ajili ya kuelewa vizuri zaidi na kuthamini hukumu za kimungu za Allaah.

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.

Kutokana na historia ya maendeleo ya Fiqh na mabadiliko ya Madh-habs yaliyoelezwa katika sura zilizotangulia, tumeona kwamba kulikuwepo kipindi ambapo tofauti za asili kati ya Madh-habs mbalimbali zilikuzwa kupita kiasi hadi zikafikia kiwango cha ushabiki wa kimadhehebu, kiasi kwamba wanazuoni wa wakati ule waliacha Ijtihaad na kuwalazimisha Waislamu wengi kufuata kwa upofu (Taqleed) mojawapo ya Madh-habs nne kuu. Hata hivyo, Maimamu ambao madhehebu hayo nne yanahusishwa nao wenyewe walipinga kabisa kuweka tofauti hizi juu ya kiti cha enzi, na walipigana vikali dhidi ya Taqleed, iwe miongoni mwa wafuasi wao wenyewe au miongoni mwa umma kwa ujumla. Lakini hadi leo, watu wengi wanahisi kwamba ikiwa Hadeeth sahihi inapaswa kutupwa kwa sababu kuikubali kungemaanisha kutangaza kwamba Imaam wa madhehebu ya mtu alikosea katika hukumu yake, jambo ambalo wao wanaliona kuwa ni kitendo cha kutomheshimu kinachokaribiana na kufuru. Hawatambui kwamba kupendelea maoni ya Imaam wao kuliko kauli ya Mtume ﷺ ni kinyume kabisa na msimamo aliouchukua Imaam wao mwenyewe, na kwa kweli kinakaribia kuwa aina ya Shirk198 inayojulikana kama “Shirk fee Tawheed alIttibaa‘”, yaani kushiriki katika ufuasi usiohojiwa ambao ni wa Mtume ﷺ peke yake. Kwani katika tamko la Uislamu wa mtu (hakuna mungu isipokuwa Allaah, na Muhammad ni Mtume wa Allaah), Mtume ﷺ anakubaliwa kuwa ndiye mtu pekee anayepaswa kufuatwa bila kuhojiwa, kwa kuwa kumfuata yeye ni sawa na kumfuata Allaah.

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.

Kwa kuwa Waislamu wengi leo hawajui tofauti kati ya msimamo wa Maimamu wa mwanzo na madhhab yao kama yalivyo leo, inafaa kuangalia kwa karibu msimamo waliouchukua Maimamu hao na wanafunzi wao kuhusu Taqlidi, kama unavyojitokeza katika kauli zao halisi.

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.