Ba'zilar bitta imomga yoki bitta fiqh mazhabiga ergashish majburiy, deb da'vo qiladilar. Bu mutlaqo noto'g'ri, chunki bizga bitta aniq insonga emas, balki Islomga ergashish buyurilgan. Ijtihad shartlariga javob beradigan kishi ham bitta aniq mazhabga ergashishi shart emas. Mujtahid bo'lmagan kishi ham bitta aniq mazhabga ergashishi shart emas. Aksincha, har bir inson Mujtahidlar tomonidan chiqarilgan yoki xulosa qilingan Shari'atga ergashishga buyurilgan. Demak, ergashish Shari'atgadir, imomga yoki mujtahidga emas. Bu fikrni har bir olim va imom ta'kidlagan.

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.

Boshqa tomondan, hozirgi vaziyat tufayli musulmon ummatiga yangi fiqh maktabi kerak, degan da'vo asossizdir. Chunki haqiqatda zarur bo'lgan narsa Islomni keng qamrovli tarzda qo'llashdir, mavjud fiqh maktablari qatoriga yana bir maktab qo'shish emas. Shunga qaramay, esda tutilishi shart bo'lgan ikki omil bor.

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) Har kuni, har bir davrda va har bir avlodda yangi muammolar paydo bo‘lib turadi va 2) Ummat har qanday muammoni hal qilish uchun ilohiy hukmga amal qilishga buyurilgan.

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.

Ushbu ikki omil shuni talab qiladiki, musulmon ummatining har bir avlodida yangi paydo bo‘layotgan muammolarni hal qilish uchun kamida bitta mujtahid bo‘lishi lozim. Hukmi shar’iyni istinbot qilish uchun bu mujtahid eski muammolarni qayta muhokama qilishi shart emas, chunki ular allaqachon hal etilgan. Shunday ekan, bu borada zarur bo‘lgan narsa – mujtahidlarning yangi muammolarni hal qilish maqsadida ijtihad talablariga javob berishidir, va bunda yangi fiqhiy maktab tashkil etish shart emas.

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.

Biroq, yangi paydo bo'layotgan muammolarga yechim topish uchun ummat orasida ijtihod qiladigan ko'plab mujtahidlarning mavjudligi ijtihod eshiklari yopilgach, keskin kamayib ketdi. Bu fojiali voqea Bag'dodning talon-taroj qilinishidan keyin, hijriy yettinchi asrda yuz berdi. Bu ummatda muammo keltirib chiqardi, chunki ijtihod eshigining yopilishi ijtihod qila oladigan kishilarning juda oz bo'lib qolishiga olib keldi. Shu sababli yangi paydo bo'layotgan muammolar Shariat asosida hal etilmay qoldi.

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.

Ijtihad eshigining yopilishi ummatning Islomga amal qilishdagi holati borasida turli falsafalarning paydo bo‘lishiga olib keldi.

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.

Bu falsafalarni quyidagicha umumlashtirish mumkin:

These philosophies can be summarised as follows:

Ba'zi kishilar yangi masalalar yuzasidan, hech qanday dalil yoki ijtihod qilishning aniq uslubisiz, o'z fikrlaridan kelib chiqib hukmlar bera boshladilar.

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

Boshqalar ijtihod uchun zarur bo'lgan shartlarga ega bo'lmasdan, shoshilib javoblarga sakrab o'tdilar. Ular ijtihodning yopilmasligini va hozirgi vaziyatda har bir kishiga ijtihod qilish imkoniyati berilganini da'vo qildilar.

 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.

Boshqalar ijtihodni inkor eta boshladilar, har bir masala ixtilofli ekanligini va shuning uchun kishi o‘ziga qulay bo‘lgan narsani tanlab olishi mumkinligini da’vo qilib.

 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.

Yuqorida keltirilgan barcha da'volar asossizdir, chunki ular musulmonlarni o'z xohish-istaklarini, o'z aqllarini yoki boshqa birovning aqlini manba sifatida qabul qilishga olib keldi, holbuki bizga Islomni yagona va yagona manba sifatida qabul qilish buyurilgan.

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.

Ijtihadning eshiklari yopilmasligi kerak edi, chunki ijtihadsiz yangi masalalar Hukm Shar‟iy bilan hal etilmagan bo‘lar edi. Shu bilan birga, ijtihadning eshiklari hech qanday cheklovlar, nazorat yoki shartlarsiz keng ochib qo‘yilmasligi kerak. Aslida mujtahid darajasiga erishish uchun bajarilishi lozim bo‘lgan ko‘plab shartlar bor, jumladan, ixlos va adolat.

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.

Boshqalar mazhablarning ko'pligidan foydalanib, eng qulay fikrni izlab yurishni va har bir mujtahidning g'alati hukmlarini to'plashni boshladilar. Bunday kishilar har bir mazhabga borib, mazhabning joiz fikrlarini harom narsalaridan ajratardilar. Ular joiz hukmlarni olib, harom bo'lganlarini tashlab ketardilar, natijada hamma narsa halol, hech narsa harom bo'lmagan yangi bir mazhabga kelib qolardilar. Bu ish Islomdan katta og'ishdir.

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.

Imom Al-Bayhaqiy rivoyat qilgan: "Isma'il al-Qodiy dedi: „Bir kuni men Abbosiylar xalifalaridan biri bo'lgan Al-Mu'tadid huzuriga kirdim, va u darhol menga o'qish uchun bir kitob ko'rsatdi. Men unda muallifning har bir olimning g'alati gaplarini to'plaganini ko'rdim. Shunda men xalifaga bu kitob muallifi bid'atchi ekanini aytdim. Xalifa buning sababini so'radi va men unga o'sha gaplar bu kitobda ko'rsatilgandek olimlar tomonidan bayon qilinmagani haqida gapirdim. Mut'a nikohini halol qilgan kishi qo'shiqni halol qilmagan, bir amalni halol qilgan kishi boshqa amalni halol qilmagan. Bundan tashqari, har bir olimning g'alati fikrlari bor, shuning uchun agar kimdir barcha imomlarning xatolarini to'plab, ularga amal qilsa, dinni yo'qotib qo'yadi." Shunda xalifa kitobni yoqib yuborishni buyurdi." Imom Al-Avzo'iy dedi: "Olimlarning g'alati fikrlarini izlagan kishi Islomdan chiqqan bo'ladi. Siz ko'p bilimga va qadrga ega bo'lgan olimni topasiz, lekin uning ham xatosi bor. Shunday ekan, agar kishi barcha olimlarning xatolarini yig'ib, yangi mazhab tuzsa, u qanday ilmga ega bo'lar edi?"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

Boshqalar esa turli mazhablarga ega bo‘lish noto‘g‘ri ekanini da’vo qiladi va barcha mazhablarni qayta birlashtirib, yagona bir mazhab ostida birlashish kerakligini aytadi. Bu mazhab butunlay mazhabchilikdan xoli bo‘lib, sog‘lom ilmiy asosga mustahkam tayangan bo‘lishi kerak. Ularning fikricha, bu ummatni birlashtirishning zaruriy sharti bo‘lib, shundan keyingina xalifalikni o‘rnatish masalasiga kirishish mumkin.

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.

Mazhablarning ko'pligi o'zi maqsad emas edi. Maqsad hukmlarni tushunib, ularni amalga oshirishdir. Matnni tushunish turli fikrlarga olib keladi, bu esa turli mazhablarga olib keladi. Bunga bo'limda keltirilgan sabablarga ko'ra.

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.