Taqlīd (Blind Following)
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
I once said to a distinguished Indian muftī and jurist that some authentic ḥadīths mention the performance of nafl prayers before ṣalāt al-maghrib, yet people neither pray at that time themselves nor allow others to do so. He replied, “We are Ḥanafīs, and in our school there is no nafl prayer prescribed before maghrib.”
I asked, “You Ḥanafīs say that before ʿishāʾ there are four units (rakʿāt) of non-emphasised Sunnah (sunnah ghayr muʾakkadah). Do these have any proof from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم?” He said, “We do not regard those four units as farḍ, wājib, or even sunnah muʾakkadah; therefore, why should we require proof for them?”
I replied, “I am not asking you for the proof of a farḍ or wājib act, but for that of a sunnah ghayr muʾakkadah. Is there any evidence that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم himself prayed these four units?” He answered, “It is written in our books, and we are muqallids (followers).”
—
The word taqlīd derives from qilādah—the rope placed around the neck of a camel or another animal. Thus, the meaning of taqlīd is that a person places his own rope in another’s hand, allowing him to lead him wherever he wishes. This is the essence of taqlīd: to follow someone without evidence. Just as a camel follows its master blindly—never asking where it is going or why—the muqallid follows others in the same way, never questioning their direction or reason, merely imitating.
Such behaviour degrades the dignity of man, whom Allah has honoured with the noble gifts of intellect (ʿaql) and natural discernment (fiṭrah).
The scholars have defined taqlīd in this sense. Ibn Taymiyyah (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “Al-taqlīd huwa qabūlu al-qawli bi-ghayri dalīl” — Taqlīd is accepting a statement without any proof.
Al-Jurjānī wrote:
> “It is to follow another person in what he says or does, believing it to be true, without reflection or examination of the evidence.”
And it has also been said:
> “Al-taqlīd huwa ittibāʿ man lam tuqam bi-ittibāʿihi ḥujjah wa lam yastanid ilā ʿilm” — Taqlīd is to follow someone whose following is unsupported by proof and not grounded in knowledge.
In another formulation:
> “Al-taqlīd huwa qabūlu qawlin bilā ḥujjah” — to accept a statement without any evidence.
—
This attitude became so entrenched that Imām Abū al-Ḥasan al-Karkhī (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “Every verse that contradicts our school is either to be interpreted (muʾawwalah) or abrogated (mansūkhah), and every ḥadīth that contradicts our school is likewise to be interpreted or abrogated.”
Similarly, Imām Abū Ḥafṣ ʿUmar al-Nasafī (raḥimahuʾllāh), author of Tafsīr al-Taysīr, wrote:
> “The principle is that any verse opposing the view of our scholars must be taken as abrogated, outweighed, or—preferably—interpreted to achieve harmony.”
—
Allah revealed the Qurʾān and appointed one man as His Messenger—none other than the Prophet Muḥammad صلى الله عليه وسلم—whom He personally guided and corrected through revelation whenever a lapse occurred, until He made him a perfect model and an excellent exemplar for all humankind.
After him, every human being—be it Abū Ḥanīfah or Mālik, al-Bukhārī or Muslim, al-Fārābī or Ibn Sīnā, al-Ghazālī or Ibn Taymiyyah, or Shāh Walī Allāh and al-Shawkānī—was meant to be a muttabiʿ (follower) of that same Prophet.
Reading the Qurʾān does not make anyone a prophet, for this Book only makes its readers followers of the Prophet, never prophets themselves. The command to follow is repeated in the Qurʾān and Sunnah using various terms—ittibāʿ, iqtidāʾ, and taʾassī—but the word taqlīd appears nowhere. Clearly, taqlīd is not synonymous with ittibāʿ or iqtidāʾ.
—
The most distinguishing feature of ittibāʿ is that it accords with reason and the voice of one’s nature (fiṭrah). This is the type of following Allah has placed in human disposition.
Consider this example: when you take your small children to cross the road, they do not follow you blindly. They look left and right; if a car is approaching, they stop, and only when it passes do they cross. You do not regard this as disobedience but as intelligence.
Or, if you tell a friend, “Follow my car,” and you pass through a junction on a green light, but the light turns red for your friend and he stops—then moves again when it turns green—you would praise him for his prudence. He did not imitate blindly; he followed with understanding.
—
Someone might object, saying, “We use taqlīd in the sense of ittibāʿ.” If that were truly so, there would be no problem. But in reality, muqallids generally follow without evidence, having been convinced that they lack the capacity to understand proofs. Yet the proofs—Qurʾān and Sunnah—are in plain human language, accessible to all. Even if some ḥadīths are difficult for the layperson to interpret fully, citing them at least shows that the scholar possesses evidence. By contrast, blind taqlīd leaves the follower utterly devoid of awareness.
For this reason, the salaf al-ṣāliḥīn strongly condemned taqlīd, including the four great Imāms themselves:
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “This is my opinion, and it is the best I have reached. If anyone presents a better view, we shall accept it.”
Imām Mālik (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “I am only a man; sometimes I am right, sometimes I err. So examine my words against the Book and the Sunnah.”
Imām al-Shāfiʿī (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “If a ḥadīth is proven authentic, then throw my statement against the wall. Wherever you find the evidence, that is my view.”
Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “Do not follow me, Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, or al-Thawrī. Seek knowledge as we sought it.”
—
Mawlānā Shiblī Nuʿmānī captured this truth eloquently:
> “It is not known in what blessed hour the foundation of taqlīd was laid, that even after hundreds of revolutions of time, its chains have not weakened.” (Maqālāt-e-Shiblī, vol. 3, p. 152)
And Mawlānā Rūmī denounced it in even harsher words:
> Khalq rā taqlīd-i-shān barbād dād
Ay du sad laʿnat bar īn taqlīd bād!
“Blind imitation has ruined the people—
A thousand curses upon such imitation!”
—
Some argue: “The muqallid follows Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, who was far greater in knowledge and virtue than today’s scholars, so following him cannot be wrong.” But this is sophistry. An ordinary person does not, in reality, follow Abū Ḥanīfah directly; he only knows the local muftī who issues the ruling. If he truly had the capacity to grasp Abū Ḥanīfah’s statements, he would equally be capable of understanding the Qurʾān, its clear verses, and the sayings of the Companions and Successors.
It is said that man’s nature inclines him to follow elders, so taqlīd is natural. True—but we have already shown that ittibāʿ is indeed natural and rational. The question is: whom should one follow? The muqallids say: “Follow those who are not infallible.” We say: “Follow only the infallible Prophet.”
—
The ṣaḥābah (may Allah be pleased with them) followed the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم; their following was of the Book he was given and the Sunnah that explained it. They followed with awareness and understanding, though their levels of insight and ijtihād differed. Those qualified for ijtihād derived rulings from the Qurʾān and Sunnah; others sought guidance from them, sometimes agreeing, sometimes differing. Those less capable would ask the scholars among them for rulings when needed.
The same continued among the tābiʿīn and tabaʿ al-tābiʿīn: they sought rulings through the Qurʾān, Sunnah, and the opinions of the ṣaḥābah, but did not found independent schools named after anyone. Distinct schools (madhāhib) emerged only after the third century hijrī. Before that, people turned first to the Qurʾān, then to the Sunnah, then to the sayings of the early generations; when new issues arose, they consulted the scholars of their time—sometimes one, sometimes another.
No one ever bound himself, for life, to follow anyone other than the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.
—
In summary, all non-prophets fell into two categories:
1. Those qualified for ijtihād — they derived rulings from the Qurʾān, Sunnah, and the legacy of the salaf.
2. Those not qualified for ijtihād — they acted on the Qurʾān and Sunnah to the extent of their understanding and, in new matters, asked the learned among them—sometimes one, sometimes another.
For all, the true object of following was the Qurʾān and Sunnah, not any individual besides the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. Ittibāʿ involves the use of reason: the follower observes who possesses the stronger evidence. If two people give answers—one based on revelation and the other on personal opinion—the real ittibāʿ belongs to the one who bases his answer on revelation.
Accordingly, Imām al-Ṭaḥāwī (raḥimahuʾllāh) reported that Qāḍī Abū ʿUbayd once said to him, “But this is not the saying of Abū Ḥanīfah.” Al-Ṭaḥāwī replied, “Am I obliged to accept everything Abū Ḥanīfah said? Only a fanatic or a fool engages in taqlīd.” This statement became famous throughout Egypt as a proverb.
Likewise, Imām Abū ʿAbd Allāh Ibn Khuwaiyz Mandād al-Mālikī (raḥimahuʾllāh) said:
> “Taqlīd means following a statement for which no proof exists, and this is forbidden in religion. Ittibāʿ, however, is adherence to that which is supported by evidence. Therefore, any statement accepted without proof is taqlīd, which is invalid in religion; and any statement adhered to on the basis of evidence is ittibāʿ, which is valid and praiseworthy in religion.”
—
Disclaimer: This article was translated by AI. Original post: https://t.me/DrAkramNadwi/7070
