Present & Demand Evidence!

The methodology and practice of the Salaf (the pious predecessors) was to present evidence (dalīl) and to demand evidence, not to present or demand the citation of mere personalities or individuals. In every matter, they themselves would present proof from the Book (the Qur’an) and the Sunnah, and from their opponents too, they would demand proof solely from the Qur’an and Hadīth. So much so, that if an opponent or adversary were to base an argument on a weak hadīth, they would go as far as to say, “This narration is weak; if it were proven authentic, we too would act upon it and issue rulings (fatwā) accordingly.” You will find many such statements scattered across the writings of the Salaf, from the well-known principle Idhā sahha al-hadīth fa-huwa madhhabī (If the hadīth is authentic, then that is my school of thought/position), to expressions like:

• “…it is not strong (i.e., the narration is weak) – and had it been authentic, we would have adopted it.”
• And, “…and had it been authentic, we would have adopted it; since it is not authentic, it is not permissible to accept it.”
• And similarly, “…and had it been authentic, we would have adopted it, and we would not have transgressed it (i.e., gone beyond it).”
• And, “…but we, without a doubt, would be more excusable, safer, and more sincere in the sight of Allah, as we did not venture into what we did not know, nor did we pursue that of which we had no knowledge, which, had we known it, we would have certainly affirmed.”
• And, “…and Allah bears witness – and Allah is sufficient as a Witness – that had we been certain that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was the one who had determined it for him, we would not have transgressed that, nor would we have resorted to anything else.”

You will find such statements spread across the pages of their works. This is because they learned this very method from their predecessors, the Companions (Sahābah), who would not give precedence to any member of the Ummah over direct evidence, even if that person were the best of creation after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).

From the esteemed Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all), we also find many reported statements, such as:

• “By Allah, I do not see you desisting until Allah punishes you! We narrate to you from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and you narrate to us from Abū Bakr and ‘Umar?!” [Musannaf ‘Abd ar-Razzāq: 9959]
• And, “Is the Book of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, more deserving of being followed, or ‘Umar?” [Al-Amālī fī Āthār as-Sahābah by ‘Abd ar-Razzāq: 142]
• And, “Should we follow the command of my father? Or the command of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him)?” [Jāmi‘ at-Tirmidhī: 824]
• And, “The first call to prayer (Adhān) on Friday is an innovation (bid‘ah).” [Musannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah: 5437]

Many such statements are found.

And one observes that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), regarding the issue of tayammum (dry ablution) for a person in a state of major ritual impurity (junubī), set aside the opinion of Companions as jurisprudentially astute (afqah an-nās) as Sayyidunā ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and Sayyidunā ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Abbās (may Allah be pleased with them both), and instead acted upon the opinion of Abū Mūsā al-Ash‘arī (may Allah be pleased with him) because he possessed the evidence. Similarly, concerning the blood money (diyah) for a finger, they left the opinion of Sayyidunā ‘Umar al-Fārūq (may Allah be pleased with him) and acted upon the opinion of Mu‘āwiyah ibn Abī Sufyān (may Allah be pleased with him) because he had evidence from a hadīth of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). When Ad-Dahhāk ibn Sufyān (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated a hadīth, Sayyidunā ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) accepted a wife as an heir to her husband’s blood money, retracting his previous stance. When Abū Bakr as-Siddīq (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated a hadīth, Sayyidah Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) never again, for the rest of her life, demanded the inheritance of Fadak. There are scores of such examples among the Companions. They followed the evidence; upon seeing or hearing the evidence, they would retract their previous positions. They never presented their personal opinions or analogies (qiyās) in the face of evidence, nor did they initiate debates about who was afdal (more virtuous) or mafdūl (less virtuous), arguing that it is obligatory for the less virtuous to follow the more virtuous. Rather, they considered it obligatory to follow the mafdūl when the mafdūl possessed the evidence. This was because they knew that knowledge is not the exclusive property of anyone; sometimes, the mafdūl may have knowledge of certain matters that the afdal and more learned do not. For instance, Sayyidunā Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī (may Allah be pleased with him) knew the hadīth about seeking permission three times to enter a house and then departing if not granted, but Sayyidunā ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was unaware of it. ‘Ammār ibn Yāsir (may Allah be pleased with him) remembered the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) directive concerning tayammum for the junubī, while Sayyidunā ‘Abdullāh ibn Mas‘ūd (may Allah be pleased with him) had forgotten it. Sayyidunā ‘Abdullāh ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) knew which tree resembled a believer, while senior Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all) were not aware of it. There are countless such examples where a matter remained hidden from one who was more virtuous and knowledgeable, while one of lesser standing had a complete understanding of it. Therefore, in matters of religious law (shar‘ī masā’il), they did not give importance to personalities but rather to evidence. Whichever position was supported by evidence from Divine Revelation (Wahy Ilāhī), they adopted it. This was their methodology (manhaj) and their path (maslak).

And why should it not be so, when Allah Almighty Himself taught them this method:

Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord, and do not follow other guardians apart from Him. Little do you remember!

Al-A’raf: 3

And if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best and most excellent in interpretation.

An-Nisa’: 59

This is that luminous, clear path (mahajjah baydā’), and this is that sound methodology (manhaj salīm) which Allah has termed the “way of the believers” (sabīl al-mu’minīn) and has forbidden opposing it:

And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers – We will turn him to that which he has chosen and drive him into Hell, and evil is that destination.

An-Nisa’: 115

Furthermore, He stated:

And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger – then indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.

Al-Anfal: 13

The noble Prophet (peace be upon him) was also sent by Allah Almighty with this very methodology:

Say, “Produce your proof, if you should be truthful.”

Al-Baqarah: 111, An-Naml: 64

Bring me a scripture [revealed] before this or a remnant of knowledge, if you should be truthful.

Al-Ahqaf: 4

In essence, the methodology of the noble Prophet (peace be upon him), the methodology of the esteemed Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all), and the methodology of the Successors (Tābi‘īn), the followers of the Successors (Taba‘ Tābi‘īn), and the predecessors of the Ummah (Salaf al-Ummah) is the adherence to evidence, the demand for evidence, and action based on evidence.

Whereas, those who lack evidence follow individuals and personalities, and in seeking conformity, they demand [the citation of] personalities. This is just as Pharaoh did when he could find no answer to the arguments of Mūsā (peace be upon him), and said:

“Then what is the case of the former generations?”

Ta-Ha: 51

Mūsā (peace be upon him) did not answer this question of his directly but rather stated:

“Their knowledge is with my Lord in a Record. My Lord neither errs nor forgets.”

Ta-Ha: 52

Mūsā (peace be upon him) neither declared the people of former generations to be guided nor misguided. For if, in that assembly, he had called them misguided, Pharaoh would have exclaimed, “Look, he is calling your forefathers misguided!” thereby inciting the people and nullifying the impact of Mūsā’s call. And if he had declared them guided, Pharaoh would have retorted, “Then we are merely following the religion of our forefathers.” Therefore, Mūsā (peace be upon him) responded to Pharaoh’s question by stating that their affair rests with Allah; now, if you have any evidence in the arena of argument, present it. Simultaneously, he further introduced his Lord Almighty and advanced his call.

Before this, when Ibrāhīm (peace be upon him) invited his people to Tawhīd (the Oneness of Allah) and told them to abandon idol worship, they said:

“We found our fathers worshipping them.”

Al-Anbiya: 53

Meaning, they considered their forefathers and ancestors as the criterion of truth instead of evidence. This is not the way of the people of faith (Ahl al-Īmān). The people of faith are seekers of evidence and followers of evidence alone. This is their methodology, which their religion has given them. And in following truth and evidence, even a single individual can constitute the Jamā‘ah (the main body of Muslims, or the community), as ‘Abdullāh ibn Mas‘ūd (may Allah be pleased with him) stated:

“The Jamā‘ah is that which conforms to the truth, even if you are alone.”

Al-Madkhal ilā ‘Ilm as-Sunan lil-Bayhaqī: 1/419

And Allah, the Glorified and Exalted, declared Ibrāhīm (peace be upon him), though alone, to be an Ummah (a nation or a model leader):

Indeed, Ibrāhīm was an Ummah (a leader having all good qualities, or a nation in himself), devoutly obedient to Allah, inclining toward truth, and he was not of those who associate others with Allah.

An-Nahl: 120

Imām Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

“So beware, beware, O man, lest you detest anything that the Messenger (peace be upon him) brought, or reject it due to your desires, or in defense of your madhhab (school of thought), or your shaykh, or due to your preoccupation with worldly desires or the Dunyā (this world). For indeed, Allah has not obligated upon anyone the obedience of anyone except the obedience of His Messenger and the adherence to what he brought, such that if a servant were to oppose all of creation but follow the Messenger, Allah would not question him about opposing anyone. For whoever obeys or is obeyed, is only obeyed in subordination to the Messenger; otherwise, if he were to command something contrary to what the Messenger commanded, he would not be obeyed. So know this, listen, obey, follow, and do not innovate (lā tabtadi‘). Lest you become cut off (from good), with your deeds rejected. Nay, there is no good in a deed that is devoid of following (the Sunnah), nor is there any good in its doer. And Allah knows best.”

Majmu’ al-Fatāwā: 16/528-529

Imām Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) says:

“And be on the side where Allah and His Messenger are, even if all the people are on the other side.”

Al-Fawa’id: 115

In conclusion, to establish rulings of Sharī‘ah, one must demand evidence. One should not ask, “Has anyone established this ruling before?” because the method of demanding evidence is taught by Allah, and it is the way of the Prophets and Messengers, the Companions, and the Salaf. The one who walks this path is a follower of the “way of the believers” (sabīl al-mu’minīn), even if he is alone.