Thoughts following on from one of the 'Manners of Differing' talks.
In opening, it is important to state our two extremes before searching out a middle path: On the one hand, there are those who refuse to differ, "every way and any way, we're all God's people". On the other hand are those who are excessively narrow-minded, "my way and no other way. If you don't do as I do, you are rejecting the Sunnah and thus..." These extremes are against the spirit of Islam and split the Muslims into a large number of groups.
We acknowledge that Allah created us different and not as one nation; we have different backgrounds, colours, histories, and so on. Thus, there is bound to be differences in the way we think and reason. This is a simplified argument. However, to begin to understand the topic at hand in a deeper manner an academic approach is necessary. We have to understand that Allah allows certain room of disagreement within certain boundaries. There will be disagreements and there were many disagreements between the Companions of Allah's Messenger (SAW). Allah intended these. However, those disagreements that go against the spirit of disagreement are disliked by Allah.
We need to know what the rules and limits of the Companions' disagreements were, so that we see it as a healthy phenomenon liked by Allah and not an evil phenomenon disliked by Allah. For example, recitation of the Qur'an; there are seven different ways of acceptable recitation. The individual is to recite that which is easy for him.
We can say that the Companions' disagreements were intended by Allah if we find them to be confined within certain boundaries. Three characteristics define these boundaries:
- They differed and disagreed but dealt with each other with respect, and there was no hatred between them.
- These disagreements were motivated by seeking the truth, and all matters were referred to Allah and His Messenger (i.e. the Qur'an and Sunnah).
- They remained one Ummah.
Umer ibn Abdil 'Azeez said, "These disagreements are more beloved to me than this red camel." Another pious predecessor (I forget his name) wrote a book which he called 'Kitaab-ul-Khilaaf' (The book of differences). He was advised to change it to 'Kitaab-ur-Rahmah' (The book of mercy) and so he did. Why was this? Because Islamic Jurispudence (Fiqh) is enriched by this differing. These disagreements can be sources of mercy if we implement certain guidelines. But this is something we don't know: How to make these differences positives rather than negatives.
There are two types of disagreement: Illegitimate opinions (odd arguments) and legitimate opinions. As for the latter, any disagreements against the consensus of the Companions and what the Muslim Ummah agrees upon are odd and illegitimate (and condemned). If the Companions agreed on something, then there is no scope for disagreement on that matter. If they disagreed on a matter, then search out that which is "best". Any opinion based on illegitimate proof/motivation/intention is also odd, even if it doesn't go against the consensus.
That last sentence may be a bit hard to take in. When an opinion is based on desire then for such a person that opinion is odd regardless of the opinion itself. For example, if asked, "Why are you following that opinion?" You respond, "It suits me." Then that is illegitimate. As concrete examples, consider these:
- You follow the opinion that you can marry a woman without her guardian's consent, and you do so. Then, when your daughter grows and wishes to marry without your consent, you prefer the opposite opinion.
- The majority of scholars whom you normally follow strongly believe that music is not allowed. But you like music, so you choose the minority weak opinion this time round.
- You follow a Sheikh without bothering to learn the Daleel (evidences/proofs/reasoning) behind his views, then though his opinions may be legitimate your motivation is not right.
And Allah, the Most Glorified and Exalted, knows best.