Min Aalam al-Mujaddidin - Salih Al-Fawzan - (16)

Min Aalam al-MujaddidinSalih Al-Fawzan

of rank, so much so that even those who, on the basis of their own ijtihad, hold positions that differ from his school, and those who simply follow other imams, still venerate his textual proofs and legal opinions. They recognize the deference due to them and their closeness to the primary texts and to the rulings of the Companions. Whoever compares his fatwas with theirs will see them in full accord, as though they all issued from a single lamp. Indeed, when the Companions themselves split into two views on a question, two corresponding reports are usually found from him as well. His diligence in seeking out the fatwas of the Companions matched—rather, surpassed—the diligence with which his own students pursued his rulings and statements; so much so that he would even give their verdicts precedence over a mursal hadith.

The foundational principles of his school
His legal methodology rested on five pillars:

The scriptural texts. Whenever he found a text, he delivered his ruling in accordance with it, paying no heed to anything—or anyone—that opposed it.
The fatwas of the Companions. If he came across a ruling from any Companion and knew of no contrary view among them, he adhered to it and did not move to anything else. Out of pious caution he would not call that a consensus; rather, he would say, “I know of nothing that contradicts it,” or words to that effect.
When the Companions differed on an issue, he would choose from their views the one closest to the Quran and the Sunnah, never stepping outside their statements. If no particular view appeared to him to carry stronger evidence, he would simply report the disagreement without committing to a position.
He would accept a mursal or weak hadith when nothing in the chapter contradicted it, preferring it to analogical reasoning. By “weak” he meant what falls below sahih yet remains within the broad category of hasan; he did not mean reports that are fabricated, rejected, or transmitted by a suspect narrator.
If there was no text, no statement from any Companion, and no mursal or weak report, he would then resort to analogy, employing it only when necessity demanded.

طبقاتهم حتى إن المخالفين لمذهبه بالاجتهاد والمقلدين لغيره يعظمون نصوصه وفتاواه ويعرفون لها حقها وقربها من النصوص وفتاوي الصحابة، ومن تأمل فتاواه وفتاوي الصحابة رأى مطابقة كل منهما على الأخرى، ورأى الجميع كأنها تخرج من مشكاة واحدة، حتى إن الصحابة إذا اختلفوا على قولين جاء عنه في المسألة روايتان، وكان تحريه لفتاوي الصحابة كتحري أصحابه لفتاويه ونصوصه بل أعظم، حتى إنه ليقدم فتاويهم على الحديث المرسل. أصول مذهبه: كان مذهبه مبنياً على خمسة أصول وهي: ١- النصوص، فإذا وجد نصاً أفتى بموجبه ولم يلتفت إلى ما خالفه ولا من خالفه. ٢- ما أفتى به الصحابة –فإذا وجد لأحدهم فتوى لا يعرف له مخالف منهم فيها لم يعدها إلى غيرها، ولم يقل إن ذلك إجماع- بل من ورعه في العبارة يقول: لا أعلم شيئاً يدفعه أو نحو هذا. ٣- إذا اختلف الصحابة في المسألة تخير من أقوالهم ما كان أقربها إلى الكتاب والسنة ولم يخرج عن أقوالهم، فإن لم يتبين له موافقة أحد الأقوال للدليل حكى الخلاف ولم يجزم بقول. ٤- الأخذ بالمرسل والحديث الضعيف إذا لم يكن في الباب شيء يدفعه ويرجح ذلك على القياس، والمراد بالحديث الضعيف عند قسيم الصحيح، وقسم من أقسام الحسن، وليس المراد بالضعيف عنده الباطل والمنكر ولا ما في روايته متهم. ٥- فإذا لم يكن هناك نص ولا قول للصحابة أو أحدهم ولا أثر مرسل أو ضعيف عدل إلى القياس فاستعمله للضرورة.