Shah Wali Allah on Taqlid

Noor Mohammed Khalid, ISTAC-IIUM

In book 7 of Hujjatullah al-Baligha, Shah Wali Allah traces the historical developments in

Islamic learning from the earliest centuries up to the era during which disputes between

different scholars arose, and the situation as it prevailed during his own lifetime. In Shah Wali

Allah’s understanding, the disputes among scholars began to grow in the fourth century of the

Hijra due to the passing away of learned men who were very well-versed in the sciences of

hadith and fiqh and were people of ability. After this era the Islamic world witnessed a

dwindling of capable scholars which led to people adhering to one school of thought or the

other.

Even though, asserts Shah Wali Allah, there did exist in the early generations people who did

taqlid of specific scholars, their adherence to these scholars was not unqualified and absolute.

In the fourth century, observes Shah Wali Allah, the people “were not agreed on the absolute

imitation (taqlid) of the school of a single person and relying only on his opinion….” Rather,

he avers, “In cases involving consensual issues about which there was no disagreement

among the Muslims and among the majority of the mujtahids, the common people only

performed taqlid of the master of legislation (the Prophet). They used to learn the manner of

ablution, full bath, prayer, zakat and so on from their forefathers or the teachers of their

cities—and they acted according to this. If some uncommon situation arose, they would ask

for a legal opinion about it from whichever mufti they found without specifying a legal

school.” 1

1
Hermansen, K. Marcia, The Conclusive Argument from God, Islamic Research Institute, International
Islamic University, Islamabad, 2003. p. 451
He goes on to write, quoting Imam Ghazali, that in later generations “people abandoned

theology and the disciplines of knowledge of the religious sources ('ilm) and became

interested instead in contentious issues.” 2

The Shah adds, “Among them are that people came to depend on taqlid, and this taqlid

slowly crept into their hearts while they remained unaware of it.” 3

Explaining how this situation came to be, he notes, “One reason for this was competition

among the jurists and their disputing among themselves, so that when competition in giving

legal opinions occurred among them, whoever gave a fatwa about something was

contradicted about that fatwa. He then replied to this so that the discussion was not brought to

a conclusion except through recourse to the pronouncement of someone who had given a

verdict on the issue in an earlier era.” 4

“An additional reason for taqlid, he candidly says, “was the injustice of the judges, for once

most of the judges had become unjust and were no longer reliable, only that on which the

common people did not cast doubt was accepted from them, i.e., something which had been

ruled on previously.” 5

Shah Wali Allah also mentions other intractable differences that were found among the so-

called learned people of these later generations. He describes the detrimental nature of these

disputes in the following words, “The harmfulness of this disputation, disagreement, and

hair-splitting was close to that of the first crisis (of the Muslim community) when people

quarrelled over rulership and took up sides. Just as the former resulted in a tyrannical

rulership and events of severity and folly—similarly these latter (disputes) led to ignorance,

interpolations, doubts, and conjecture from which there is no hope of deliverance. Subsequent

to them generations arose who relied purely on taqlid, neither distinguishing the true from the

2
Ibid, p. 453
3
Ibid, pp. 453-454
4
Ibid, 454
5
Ibid, p. 454
false nor the argument from the inference (istinbat)”. 6 Note the choice of words in which

Shah Wali Allah expresses his deep anguish about those who caused schism among the

Muslims in the later centuries, “The faqih of this time was a prattler and wind-bag who

indiscriminately memorized the opinions of the jurists whether these opinions were strong or

weak, and related them in a loud-mouthed harangue; and the hadith scholar (muhaddith)

became a person who counted up the hadiths whether sound, faulty, or nonsensical, and

recited them quickly like an entertainer, flapping his jaw full-force.” 7

However, the Shah qualifies the above indictment in these words, “I don't say that this is so in

all cases, for God has a group of His worshippers unharmed by their failure, who are God's

proof on His earth even if they have become few.” 8

Yet, he moans that, “No time has come after that except that the crisis has increased and

taqlid has become more prevalent, and integrity has become more and more absent from

people's hearts until they have become content to leave off examining religious matters and

so that they say, "We found our fathers following a community and we follow in their

footsteps”.”

Interestingly, Shah Wali Allah quotes in detail the stand of Ibn Hazm who was vehemently

opposed to taqlid, which may lead to one believing that he, unequivocally, sides with the

Andalusian scholar in this matter. But, in the following paragraph, the Shah provides his own

opinion in this matter as follows:

“(Ibn Hazm's saying applies to) the person who is not learned and follows a particular one of

the jurists believing that no one like him could err and that what he said must definitely be

correct, and who has secreted in his heart not to leave off following him even if a proof

opposing him would come to light.”. He adds, “This statement (of lbn Hazm) does not apply

6
Ibid, p. 454
7
Ibid, p.p. 454-455
8
Ibid, p. 455
to the one who obeys only the sayings of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be

upon him, and only considers permitted what Allah and his Prophet made permissible, and

only considers forbidden what God and his prophet have forbidden. However if he doesn't

have information about what the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him,

said, neither by way of correlating conflicting statements about what he said, nor by means of

deduction from his saying, he may follow a rightly-guided learned person provided that he is

correct in what he says, and that he gives a clear legal opinion clearly based on the sunna of

the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him….” 9

In support of his stand that preference must be given to a sound hadith over mere rulings

issuing from jurists, he directly quotes the leading Imams in support. "In the case when I have

held something or established it as a principle, if there should later come to your attention

some saying of the Prophet, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, conflicting

with what I said, then what he, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, said, must

be upheld." (Imam Shafi’i). 10

Abu Hanifa, may God be pleased with him, used to say, "One who does not know my

indicating factor (dalil) must not give a fatwa based on my opinion," and he, may God be

pleased with him, whenever he gave a fatwa, used to say, "Al-Nu'man ibn Thabit, i.e., his

own name, has this view and this is the best we were able to do, so if someone comes up with

something better, this is more correct." Imam Malik, may God be pleased with him, used to

say, "Anyone's opinion may either be accepted or rejected except that of the Prophet of God,

may the peace and blessings of God be upon him." 11

9
Ibid, pp 458-459
10
Ibid p. 462
11
Ibid, pp. 463-464
Al-Hakim and al-Baihaqqi reported that al-Shafi'i used to say, "If there is a sound hadith, that

becomes my opinion," and in another report, "If you see that my opinion opposes this hadith,

then act according to the hadith, and throw my opinion out of the window." 12

The above notwithstanding, the Shah is cognizant of the common people and their lack of

recourse to Islamic knowledge. Thus, he says, “the school of the common person is the fatwa

of his mufti.” 13

Commenting on Shah Wali Allah’s exposition of the disputes that arose among the scholars

and the common people from the fourth century onwards, and his allusion to blind taqlid as

being responsible for much of the internecine quarrels, Maulana Mufti Saeed Ahmed

Palanpuri, in volume two of his five-volume commentary on Hujjatullah al-Baligha, states,

“In his statements, Shah Saheb is not inviting people to give up taqlid…Rather, the objective

is that taqlid be done with proper and clear understanding, and not blindly.

( ‫) ﻣﻘﺼﺪ ﯾہ ﮨﮯ ﮐﮯ ﻋﻠﯽ وﺟﮫ اﻟﺒﺼﯿﺮت ﺗﻘﻠﯿﺪ ﮐﯽ ﺟﺎے۔ ﮐﻮراﻧہ ﺗﻘﻠﯿﺪ ﻧہ ﮐﯽ ﺟﺎے‬. He adds, (Shah Wali Allah

contends that) the Quran and Hadith must not be considered just a source of blessings, but

these should be given an important role in one’s life. Allah be thanked! It is through the

efforts (barakah) of Shah Saheb, his progeny and his students that the stagnation (in Islamic

sciences) was broken; and the process of learning and understanding of the Quran and Hadith

was revived. The Darul Uloom Deoband and similar organizations made the study of these

disciplines widespread. Still, there is another spark that needs to be ignited:( ‫ﻣﮕﺮ اﺑﮩﯽ اﯾﮏ آﻧﭻ‬

‫)ﮐﯽ ﮐﻤﯽ ﮨﮯ‬. Unfortunately, even at the level of the graduates of these madaris, they have not

been made to understand that the Quran and Hadith are to be comprehended directly ( ‫ﺑﺮاه‬

‫)راﺳﺖ ﺳﻤﺠہ ﺟﺎے‬. The madaris consider it sufficient if the students just read them; whereas this

is not sufficient: persevering with them throughout one’s lifetime is essential.” 14 13F

12
Ibid, p. 464
13
Ibid, p. 467
14
Ahmed, Saeed, Rahmatullah Al-Wasiyah, Maktaba Hijaz, Deoband, India, 2002, pp 671-672
On following the four well-established schools, Shah Wali Allah has clearly articulated that

the ummah has agreed “on the permissibility of performing taqlid of them up until our time.

In these are benefits which are not concealed—especially in these days in which people's

endeavors fall very short, their hearts have become of self-seeking and everyone delights in

his own opinion.” 15

15
Ibid, p. 455