Means of Resolving Disputes - Conclusion

The means of resolving disputes should be made under the basis of logical, practical principles. One of the roles of the Prophet was to provide a means for resolving disputation. He was sent to be followed. If you reject the Hadith and disobey the statement of the Prophet, you are basically disobeying Allah. In the Qur'an, Allah declared it a basis for being considered a disbeliever. It's that serious. In (4:65): 

The Prophet gave us a general principle to judge differences:

Amr ibn Al-As reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “If a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning (ijtihad) and he is correct, then he will have two rewards. If a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning and he is mistaken, then he will have one reward.” (Sahih Bukhari 6919, Sahih Muslim 1716)

Just as we recognize that the early scholars are rewarded for their mistakes, it doesn’t mean we can blindly follow them. It is our responsibility to find out as much as we can regarding which of the positions are in fact correct, and then accordingly follow it.

We have to be tolerant and know that both sides are rewarded, not necessarily that both sides are correct.

One must keep in mind to place the opinions in one of two categories:

1) Contradictory differences

2) Variational differences

We can live with variational rulings; it has always existed. 

We have to resolve contradictory differences (e.g. The issue of touching a woman breaking Wudhoo)

People who blindly follow believe that every Madhhab is correct despite the fact that they may oppose each other on some information. We don’t want to be in a position where we try to justify two rulings which cannot co-exist.

The attitude we should hold towards differences:

-      Respect people’s rights to differ

-      Ensure that the differences are based on knowledge and not just based on emotion, culture, etc.

E.g. The issue of the obligation of Niqab. Everyone agrees that it is something rewarded and loved by Allah, but there’s a difference with regards to its obligation. When you look at all the evidences, in the end it comes to what you're convinced (and you have to act upon what you're convinced). But you have to respect the right of the other person to not be convinced.

This doesn’t mean you don’t try to convince them. But when you produce the evidence you can’t expect everyone else to be as convinced as you are by it, and you have to accept that this can be the case.

However, where the person is holding the position not based on evidence but on how-we-do-it-in-our-village; they’re holding it because of an emotional attachment to the culture, and you don’t have to accept that they aren't convinced by the evidence. You have to try your best to convince them.

When people are caught up in emotional situations, hard evidence doesn't have an impact, so what you have to do is raise their level of understanding so they can accept the evidence. They aren’t looking for evidence.

The only remedy for ignorance is knowledge. We have to educate them, and lift them up to the point where they can respect it.

In (16:125):

Q. When a person researches an issue in which the scholars differed, it is a requirement for the person to put aside his personal feelings?

A. Yes. If you're going into research with a biased opinion, you will tend to favour whatever information comes to support it and gloss over the evidences which don’t. You should approach the issue with an open mind. This doesn’t mean you don’t cancel out your opinion, but keep it in the background so it doesn’t dominate.

Q. You thoroughly research an issue where there is a variance in opinion and find in the end that both are sufficiently supported by evidence. What do you do?

A. Take the one which is most applicable to your circumstance, and if you find another circumstance in which it is more applicable, take the other one.