بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم
◾The people of knowledge unanimously agreed upon that the blind follower is not a scholar, meaning; in what he blind followed in◾️
Answered by our Shaykh, the 'Allāmah, the Trustworthy Advisor, Abu 'Abdirrahman Yahya bin 'Ali Al-Hajūri - may Allāh preserve him -
📥Question:
A questioner asks about blind following?
📤Answer:
"Blindfollowing is following someone, who is not a proof without proof.
This is not allowed.
And what you witness from the speech of Ibnul-Qayyim in what was relayed by Ibn Abdil-Barr or other than him, that they (the people of knowledge) unanimously agreed upon that the blind follower is not a scholar, meaning; in what he blind followed in.
For indeed he could be a scholar in Grammar and then blind follow in a fiqhi issue, this doesn't mean that he is not called a scholar at all.
Or he could be a scholar in a field from amongst the different fields of knowledge and he blind followed in issue in a different subject; he is therefore not a scholar in that particular issue which he blind followed in.
As for that he is declared ignorant upon its totality; carrying the meaning on this manner is incorrect.
The consensus only came in regards to the issue that he blind followed in, so he is not a scholar therein, he blind followed someone else in it so he is not a scholar therein.
Meaning, if we, for example say:
That a scholar in fiqh, a Faqīh from the Fuqahā, blind followed in the authentication of a hadith of a scholar of Hadith, and relayed this authentication, and said: this statement was said by so-and-so without looking into his speech, without researching, without searching, he was not able to.
Is it said this person is ignorant upon its totality?
It is said: in this issue he is not a scholar, he blind followed another in his speech on this hadith, but he is a man of fiqh.
In this manner or am I wrong!
Because to nullify his knowledge in totality due to him having blindfollowed in some issues, is incorrect.
This is understood in regards to the fanatical blindfollower who does not go beyond:
so-and-so said, and it is the opinion of the madhab, and the likes thereof.
Blindfollowing is prohibited, and blindfollowing is following one who is not a proof without proof, and following one who is not proof without proof is not from knowledge; it is ignorance.
From this angle it is said: he is not a scholar, so if he was a blindfollower in all his affairs then he is not a scholar upon totality, and if he is seeking the truth in some affairs, blindfollowing in others, then the affairs which he blind followed in he is not a scholar in them."
_
Transcribed to Arabic and summarised by:
Abdul-Majd bin Muhammad
- may Allah reward him with good -
on the 14th, Ramadhān, 1441H
Translated by:
Abu 'Abdillah 'Omar bin Yahya Al-'Akawi
Click on the link to subscribe:
https://t.me/ShaykhYahyaEn
Click on the link to view the Arabic:
https://t.me/sh_yahia_duroos/6677
◾The people of knowledge unanimously agreed upon that the blind follower is not a scholar, meaning; in what he blind followed in◾️
Answered by our Shaykh, the 'Allāmah, the Trustworthy Advisor, Abu 'Abdirrahman Yahya bin 'Ali Al-Hajūri - may Allāh preserve him -
📥Question:
A questioner asks about blind following?
📤Answer:
"Blindfollowing is following someone, who is not a proof without proof.
This is not allowed.
And what you witness from the speech of Ibnul-Qayyim in what was relayed by Ibn Abdil-Barr or other than him, that they (the people of knowledge) unanimously agreed upon that the blind follower is not a scholar, meaning; in what he blind followed in.
For indeed he could be a scholar in Grammar and then blind follow in a fiqhi issue, this doesn't mean that he is not called a scholar at all.
Or he could be a scholar in a field from amongst the different fields of knowledge and he blind followed in issue in a different subject; he is therefore not a scholar in that particular issue which he blind followed in.
As for that he is declared ignorant upon its totality; carrying the meaning on this manner is incorrect.
The consensus only came in regards to the issue that he blind followed in, so he is not a scholar therein, he blind followed someone else in it so he is not a scholar therein.
Meaning, if we, for example say:
That a scholar in fiqh, a Faqīh from the Fuqahā, blind followed in the authentication of a hadith of a scholar of Hadith, and relayed this authentication, and said: this statement was said by so-and-so without looking into his speech, without researching, without searching, he was not able to.
Is it said this person is ignorant upon its totality?
It is said: in this issue he is not a scholar, he blind followed another in his speech on this hadith, but he is a man of fiqh.
In this manner or am I wrong!
Because to nullify his knowledge in totality due to him having blindfollowed in some issues, is incorrect.
This is understood in regards to the fanatical blindfollower who does not go beyond:
so-and-so said, and it is the opinion of the madhab, and the likes thereof.
Blindfollowing is prohibited, and blindfollowing is following one who is not a proof without proof, and following one who is not proof without proof is not from knowledge; it is ignorance.
From this angle it is said: he is not a scholar, so if he was a blindfollower in all his affairs then he is not a scholar upon totality, and if he is seeking the truth in some affairs, blindfollowing in others, then the affairs which he blind followed in he is not a scholar in them."
_
Transcribed to Arabic and summarised by:
Abdul-Majd bin Muhammad
- may Allah reward him with good -
on the 14th, Ramadhān, 1441H
Translated by:
Abu 'Abdillah 'Omar bin Yahya Al-'Akawi
Click on the link to subscribe:
https://t.me/ShaykhYahyaEn
Click on the link to view the Arabic:
https://t.me/sh_yahia_duroos/6677