Question : A question was asked as to whether or not a Muslim may pick and choose opinions from different law schools.

Fatwa in Brief: It is not permitted for a Muslim to pick and choose between the rulings of the different schools. However, s/he may only follow an opinion that is sufficiently supported with evidence.

The Permanent Committee, 12/96

Response:

[In new matters] Choosing a new opinion through the careful marshalling of evidence is mandatory for scholars that are capable of doing so (i.e. the mujtahidin); while imitating [the established rulings of the different law schools] is obligatory on all others. Those who should only imitate past scholars are not obligated to follow one law school above all others; and there is nothing to prevent them benefiting from the concessions (rukhas) offered by the different schools.

Commentary:

In the category of Islamic legal rules (ahkam), some rules do not require Muslims to approach a jurist [to decide whether an act is permitted]; rather, such rules are common knowledge among all Muslims. These rules include the five pillars of Islam, and the prohibition against committing grave sins (kaba’ir). Other rules, however, require re-thinking. Indeed, most of fiqh falls within this category. The mujtahidun are those who carry the burden of re-thinking the law. The general body of Muslims is obligated to follow the schools of the mujtahidin, on the basis of God’s advice:

“Ask the followers of the Reminder if ye know not?”. (Q.21: 7)

This also holds because they cannot afford to do more than this.

It is not obligatory for the general public to follow a particular school. Thus, it is allowed for a Muslim to follow the Hanafi school of law in one matter, then switch his/her allegiance to another mujtahid [than Abu Hanifa] in a different matter. From the time of the Companions onwards, peope would consult one expert, before moving on to another expert on the next occasion. At no time were they obligated to follow only one legal expert (mufti). [Accordingly] If a member of the general public asks the opinion of a mujtahid regarding a specific matter and, after receiving it, asks for the opinion of another on the same matter, he is ultimately free to choose whichever opinion he prefers. Included here is the permission for a Muslim to follow the concessions (rukhas) of the different law schools; i.e. the one who performs his minor ritual ablutions (wudu’) according to the Hanafi school may perform his prayers according to the requirements of Shafi‘i’s’ school, and vice versa. This is legally permitted because, as has been shown, Muslims do not need to confine their questions to a single mufti, or law school.

And God knows best.

In the Fatwa Centre, under the supervision of Dr. ‘Abdullah al-Faqih:

As a result of such variation God wanted to allow His worshippers greater range and flexibility [in their lives]. If Muslims find the opinion of one scholar from a particular era to be difficult they are permitted to follow another [easier] opinion [of a different scholar from a different era]. If God had wanted a specific text of the Qur’an and/or Sunna to be read in a single way, He would have ensured that there was no disagreement on the matter. This would not have taxed Him. Rather, God wants difference [among the scholars]; and the wisdom behind this only God knows. In his book Jami’ bayan al-‘ilm wa fadluhu, Imam Ibn ‘Abd al-Bar reports that, when he and ‘Umar gathered to remember the hadiths, ‘Umar remembered things differently from Qasim. Qasim was perplexed and worried. Yet, ‘Umar reassured him by saying that they would enjoy more blessings because of their variation of opinions. This is why the People of Knowledge say that the mufti should remind the person who asks him about a matter that there are more opinions than the one he prefers. Among those who claim this is Imam al-Buhuti al-Hanbali in Sharh Muntaha al-Iradat.

The Shaykh of Islam, Ibn Taymiyya states that a jurist who gives an opinion is not permitted to criticise the ruling of someone who disagrees with him. The scholar and the mufti should not demand that people follow them. That is why al-Rashid asked Malik’s opinion about whether he [Rashid] should force people to follow him, Malik forbid him from doing so. Malik said: “The Companions of the Prophet (upon him be peace) spread out to live in different areas. Each of them went with his ideas and knowledge [so variation among scholars in different areas is natural]. Thus, when a man described a book as a work of “legal disagreement” Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] said to him: “do not call it this a book of disagreement (ikhtilaf), rather, you should call it a study in richness (si‘ah) [of opinion]”. That is why some scholars argue that when there is consensus, the evidence is beyond doubt; and that when there is disagreement, there is mercy and choice aplenty. That is to say that, if they agree on something and a person disagrees with them, then this person is considered to have strayed [from Islam]; yet, if there is a variety of opinions, and one man prefers one opinion over another, while his colleague chooses yet another opinion, then all are blessed with choice. That is what is said by the Shafi‘i (and other) scholars who are described as belonging to “those who command the right and forbid the wrong” (al-amr bil ma‘ruf wal-nahi ‘an al-munkar). Such matters of legal opinion are not to be rejected, and no one should obligate people to follow him regarding them. Yet, one can discuss his opinion from the perspective of the evidence [he knows]; thereafter, one who finds an opinion correct should follow it, while those who choose to imitate the opinion of another are also permitted to do so.[1]

And God knows best.
 

Dr. Yassir ‘Abd al-‘Azim