Baadhi ya watu wanadai kuwa ni wajibu kufuata Imamu mmoja au madhehebu moja ya Fiqh. Hili si sahihi kabisa, kwa sababu tumeamrishwa kufuata Uislamu, si mtu mmoja mahususi. Na mtu anayekidhi masharti ya Ijtihadi hana wajibu wa kufuata madhehebu moja mahususi. Hata mtu asiye Mujtahidi hana wajibu wa kufuata madhehebu moja mahususi. Badala yake, kila mtu ameamrishwa kufuata Shari‟ah, ambayo inatolewa au kuhitimishwa na Mujtahidi. Kwa hiyo, utiifu ni kwa Shari‟ah na si kwa Imamu wala Mujtahidi. Jambo hili lilisisitizwa na kila mmoja wa wanazuoni na Maimamu.

Some claim that it is mandatory to adhere to one Imam or one school of Fiqh. This is completely wrong since we are ordered to follow Islam and not to one specific human being. And the person who meets the requirements of Ijtihad does not have to adhere to one specific school of thought. Even if someone is not a Mujtahid, he does not have to follow one specific school. Rather, each individual is ordered to follow the Shari‟ah, which is extracted or deduced by Mujtahids. Consequently, the adherence is to the Shari‟ah and not the Imam or the Mujtahid. This point was emphasised by each of the scholars and Imams.

Kwa upande mwingine, dai kwamba tunahitaji madhehebu mapya ya Fiqh kutokana na hali ya sasa ya Ummah wa Kiislamu haina msingi. Kwa kuwa kinachohitajika kweli ni kutekeleza Uislamu kwa ukamilifu, na si tu kuunda madhehebu mengine miongoni mwa madhehebu mengine ya Fiqh yaliyopo tayari. Hata hivyo, kuna mambo mawili ambayo yanapaswa kukumbukwa.

On the other hand, the claim that we need a new school of Fiqh due to the current situation of the Muslim Ummah is unfounded. Since what is really needed is the application of Islam in a comprehensive way, and not just to develop another school among the other already existing schools of Fiqh. There are however, two factors that must be kept in mind.

1) Matatizo mapya yanaibuka kila siku, katika kila zama na kila kizazi, na 2) Umma umeamrishwa kufuata hukumu ya Mwenyezi Mungu (SWT) ili kutatua tatizo lolote.

1) New problems emerging daily, in every era and every generation, and that 2) The Ummah is ordered to follow the divine rule to solve any problem.

Sababu hizi mbili zinahitaji, kwa hiyo, kwamba kila kizazi cha Ummah wa Kiislamu lazima kiwe na angalau Mujtahid mmoja miongoni mwao ili kushughulikia matatizo mapya yanayojitokeza. Ili kuchambua Hukm Shar‟i, Mujtahid huyu hahitaji kujadili matatizo ya zamani kwa kuwa tayari yameshughulikiwa. Kwa hiyo, katika jambo hili, mahitaji ni kwamba Mujtahidi watimize masharti ya Ijtihad, ili kushughulikia matatizo mapya, na si lazima kuunda madhehebu mapya ya kifikra.

These two factors require therefore, that every generation of the Muslim Ummah must have at least one Mujtahid amongst them in order to address the newly arising problems. In order to deduce the Hukm Shar‟i, this Mujtahid does not have to discuss old problems since they are already addressed. Therefore, in this regard, the need is for Mujtahids to meet the requirements of Ijtihad, in order to address new problems and not necessarily form a new school of thought.

Hata hivyo, idadi kubwa ya Mujtahidi miongoni mwa Ummah waliokuwa wakitafuta suluhisho za matatizo mapya yaliyojitokeza ilipungua sana pale milango ya Ijtihad ilipofungwa. Tukio hili la kusikitisha lilitokea baada ya kuporwa kwa Baghdad katika karne ya saba ya Hijria. Hili lilisababisha tatizo katika Ummah, kwa sababu kufungwa kwa mlango wa Ijtihad kulisababisha watu wachache sana waweze kufanya Ijtihad. Hivyo, matatizo mapya yaliyojitokeza hayakuwa yakitatuliwa kwa mujibu wa Shari'ah.

However, the presence of vast numbers of Mujtahids among the Ummah to find solutions to the newly arising problems was greatly reduced when the doors of Ijtihad were closed. This tragic event took place after the sacking of Baghdad in the Seventh Century Hijri. This led to a problem in the Ummah because closing the door of Ijtihad resulted in very few people who could perform Ijtihad. Thus the newly arising problems were not being solved through the Shari‟ah.

Kufungwa kwa milango ya Ijtihadi kulisababisha kuibuka kwa falsafa mbalimbali kuhusu hali ya Ummah katika kushikamana kwake na Uislamu.

The closing of the doors of Ijtihad resulted in the development of various philosophies concerning the status of the Ummah in its adherence to Islam.

Falsafa hizi zinaweza kufupishwa kama ifuatavyo:

These philosophies can be summarised as follows:

Baadhi ya watu walianza kutoa fatwa kuhusu matatizo mapya kutokana na akili zao wenyewe, bila dalili yoyote ya Kishari'a wala mbinu maalum ya kufanya Ijtihad.

 Some people started issuing opinions concerning the new problems, from their own minds, without any Daleel or specific methodology of conducting Ijtihad.

Wengine walikimbilia kutoa majibu kabla ya kupata sharti muhimu za Ijtihad, wakidai kwamba mlango wa Ijtihad hauna budi kufunguliwa, na kwamba hali ya sasa inawapa kila mtu fursa ya kufanya Ijtihad.

 Others prematurely jumped to answers without acquiring the necessary prerequisites for Ijtihad, claiming that Ijtihad should not be closed and that the current situation provided everyone with the chance to perform Ijtihad.

Wengine walianza kuudhoofisha Ijtihad, wakidai kwamba kila suala lina mjadala, na kwa hiyo ni juu ya mtu binafsi kuchagua kile kinachomfaa zaidi.

 Others began undermining Ijtihad, claiming that every issue is debatable and therefore it is up to the individual to pick and choose whatever is most convenient.

Madai hizi zote zilizotajwa hapo juu ni batili kwa sababu zimewafanya Waislamu kuanza kuchukua matamanio yao, matakwa yao, akili zao, au akili ya mtu mwingine kuwa marejeo, ilhali tumeamrishwa kuchukua Uislamu kuwa ndio marejeo pekee na ya kipekee.

All of these claims mentioned above are invalid because they caused Muslims to start taking their desires, wishes, intellect, or someone else‟s intellect as a reference, while we are ordered to take Islam as the one and only reference.

Milango ya Ijtihad haikupaswa kufungwa, kwa sababu bila Ijtihad matatizo mapya yasingeweza kushughulikiwa kwa Hukm Shar‟i. Hata hivyo, wakati huo huo, milango ya Ijtihad haipaswi kufunguliwa bila kizuizi chochote, bila udhibiti wala masharti. Kwa kweli, kuna masharti mengi yanayopaswa kutimizwa ili kufikia sifa za Mujtahid, ikiwa ni pamoja na uaminifu wa moyo (ikhlasi) na uadilifu.

The doors of Ijtihad should not have been closed because without Ijtihad new problems would not be addressed by the Hukm Shar‟i. Yet, at the same time the doors of Ijtihad should not be flung open without any restrictions, controls or requirements. There are actually many requirements to be met in order to meet the qualifications of a Mujtahid, including sincerity and justice.

Wengine walianza kunufaika na kuwepo kwa madhehebu nyingi za kifikra kwa kutafuta kwa kuzunguka-zunguka maoni yaliyo rahisi zaidi kwao, na kukusanya hukumu za ajabu kutoka kwa kila Mujtahid. Watu hawa walienda kwa kila Madhhab wakitenganisha maoni yanayoruhusiwa na mambo yasiyoruhusiwa ya Madhhab. Walichukua hukumu zinazoruhusiwa, wakaacha zisizoruhusiwa, hadi wakaishia na Madhhab mpya ambamo kila kitu ni halali na hakuna kitu kilicho haramu. Kitendo hiki ni upotofu mkubwa kutoka katika Uislamu.

Others began taking advantage of the existence of the many schools of thought by shopping around for the most convenient opinion and compiling strange verdicts of each Mujtahid. These people went to each Madhab separating the lawful opinions from the unlawful things of the Madhab. They took the lawful verdicts, leaving the unlawful, until ending up with a new Madhab where everything is lawful and nothing is unlawful. This action is a major deviation from Islam.

Imam Al-Baihaqi alisimulia: "Isma'eel Al Qadi alisema: 'Siku moja niliingia kwa Al Mu'tadid, mmoja wa Makhalifa wa Abbasi, naye mara moja akanionyesha kitabu cha kusoma. Nikagundua kwamba mwandishi alikusanya ndani yake kauli za ajabu za kila 'Alim. Kwa hiyo nikamwambia Khalifa kwamba mwandishi wa kitabu hiki ni mzushi.' Khalifa akauliza kwa nini ilikuwa hivyo, nami nikamwambia kwamba kauli hizo hazikutolewa na wanazuoni kama zinavyowasilishwa katika kitabu hiki. Yule aliyehalalisha ndoa ya Mut'ah hakuhalalisha kuimba, na yule aliyehalalisha tendo moja hakuhalalisha tendo jingine. Zaidi ya hayo, kila 'Alim ana maoni ya ajabu, hivyo mtu akikusanya makosa ya Maimamu wote na kuyafuata, basi Dini itapotea.' Khalifa kisha akaamuru kitabu hicho kichomwe." Imam Al-Awza'i alisema: "Yule anayefuatilia kauli za ajabu za wanazuoni yuko nje ya Uislamu. Utamkuta mwanazuoni mwenye elimu nyingi na thamani, lakini pia mwenye kosa. Kwa hiyo mtu akikusanya makosa ya wanazuoni wote na kuunda Madhhab mpya, basi utakuwa na elimu ya aina gani?"41

Imam Al-Baihaqi reported: “Isma‟eel Al Qadi said: „One day I entered to Al Mu‟tadid, one of the Abbasid Khaleefahs, and immediately he showed me a book to read. I found that the author had compiled in it, the strange sayings of every „Alim. So I told the Khaleefah that the author of this book is a heretic. The Khaleefah asked why this was so, and I told him that those sayings were not presented by the scholars as they are presented in this book. He who legalised the Mu‟tah marriage did not legalise singing, while he who legalised one action would not legalise another action. Additionally, each „Alim has strange opinions, so if one would compile the pitfalls of all the Imams, and adopt them, then the Deen would be lost. The Khaleefah then ordered the book to be burned.” Imam Al-Awza‟i said: “He who traces the strange opinions of the scholars is out of Islam. You would find a scholar with a lot of knowledge and value, and also with a pitfall. So if a person was to collect the pitfalls of all the scholars and form a new Madhab, then what kind of „Ilm would you have?‟”41

Wengine wanadai kwamba kuwa na Madhhab tofauti ni jambo lisilo sahihi, na kwamba tunahitaji kuziunganisha Madhhab zote kuwa Madhhab moja pekee, iliyo huru kabisa na ufirikina na imejengwa kwa uthabiti juu ya elimu ya kweli. Wanadai kwamba hili ndilo sharti la kwanza kuelekea kuunganishwa kwa Ummah, na baada ya hapo ndipo tungeweza kuangalia kuanzishwa kwa Khilafah.

Others claim that having different Madhahib is wrong and that we need to reunify all of the Madhabs and come under one single Madhab, completely free from sectarianism and firmly based on sound scholarship. This, they claim, would be the prerequisite toward reunification of the Ummah and then after this, would we look toward establishing the Khilafah.

Uwepo wa madhehebu nyingi haukuwa lengo lenyewe. Lengo ni kuelewa hukumu ili kuzitekeleza. Kuelewa kwa maandiko kunapelekea maoni tofauti, na maoni tofauti yanapelekea madhehebu tofauti. Kwa sababu zilizoorodheshwa katika sehemu.

The presence of the many Madhahib was not in itself an objective. The objective is to understand the rules in order to execute them. The understanding of the text leads to different opinions, which leads to different Madhabs. Due to reasons listed in section.