Ibn Uthaymin
al-Khilaf bayn al-Ulama
- Author died
- 1421 AH
- Editions
- Dār al-Waṭan lil-Nashr
al-Khilaf bayn al-Ulama: Asbabuhu wa-Mawqifuna minhu (Disagreement Among the Scholars: Its Causes and Our Stance Towards It) is a legal and methodological treatise by the Saudi jurist Muhammad ibn Salih al-Uthaymin (d. 1421 AH / 2001 CE) that analyzes the origins of jurisprudential divergence among Muslim jurists and outlines the proper conduct of students and lay believers toward differing scholarly opinions.
Background and Purpose
Ibn Uthaymin authored the work as a concise handbook that simplifies and adds practical examples to the classic treatise Raf al-Malam an al-Aimmah al-A'lam (Lifting the Blame from the Illustrious Imams) by Ibn Taymiyya. In his introduction, the author explained that addressing scholarly differences had become urgent because modern mass media widely broadcast conflicting legal verdicts, causing confusion and skepticism among ordinary Muslims and students of knowledge who are unfamiliar with the underlying sources of juristic disagreements. He emphasized that valid scholarly disagreement among the early generations and jurists did not touch the fundamental tenets of the faith or its original sources, but was confined to subsidiary legal branches.
Contents and Structure
The treatise is structured around three core themes: the qualifications of legitimate jurists, the causes of juristic variation, and the correct attitude toward scholarly disagreement.
Conditions of the Mufti
Ibn Uthaymin begins by establishing that only opinions from qualified authorities carry legal weight in scholarly disputes. These reduce to two essential requirements:
- Sound religious knowledge (ilm), as a person ignorant of divine law cannot report on it.
- Moral integrity (adalah), requiring upright conduct and piety, noting the scholarly consensus cited by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi that verdicts from an impious person (fasiq) are rejected.
Causes of Scholarly Disagreement
The work details the factors leading qualified jurists to reach divergent conclusions:
- A relevant textual evidence did not reach the jurist.
- The text reached the jurist, but he deemed its transmitter unreliable or considered it superseded by what he regarded as a stronger proof.
- The jurist knew the text but forgot it at the moment of issuing a judgment.
- The jurist understood the text in a manner different from its intended meaning.
- The text was abrogated, but knowledge of the abrogating text had not reached him.
- The jurist believed the text was opposed by a weightier countervailing text or consensus.
- The jurist relied on a weak narration or a flawed deduction.
The Required Stance Toward Disagreement
The treatise instructs Muslims to distinguish between two categories of followers:
- A student grounded in religious sciences and legal principles must follow what the evidence indicates to be correct, even if it contradicts an individual imam, provided it does not violate established scholarly consensus (ijma).
- A layperson unable to distinguish between valid and flawed arguments must follow a scholar whose piety, reliability, and knowledge they trust, and is not unsettled by conflicting opinions.
Publication
The work has been published independently as a monograph, serialized in periodicals such as Majallat al-Bayan, and included within Ibn Uthaymin's compiled collections, such as Kitab al-Ilm and Majmu Fatawa wa-Rasail al-Uthaymin.
Answer updated