Ijtihad and Taqlid: Preserving the Freshness of the Spring of Shari’ah
“And We have sent down to you the Book [the Qur’an] as clarification for all things.” (QS. An-Nahl: 89)
How is it possible that a shari’ah revealed fourteen centuries ago in the Arabian Peninsula is able to provide adequate answers for issues never imagined by the human mind at that time? This question is not merely academic curiosity. It is a question that concerns the very survival of Islam itself as a comprehensive way of life.
Imagine: the Messenger of Allah ﷺ never saw a computer screen, never heard the roar of an airplane engine, never knew the concept of digital money transfers crossing continents in seconds. Yet today, the Muslim ummah is demanded to take a stance: is trading cryptocurrency permissible? What is the ruling on test-tube babies? Can artificial intelligence (AI) be a witness in court? Who is responsible if an autonomous car hits a pedestrian?
This is where lies the urgency of discussing Ijtihad and Taqlid. These two concepts are the internal mechanism of Islamic shari’ah so that it remains fresh, remains relevant, and remains capable of answering every challenge of the times without losing its original purity. Without ijtihad, the shari’ah will freeze into a useless fossil. Without taqlid, the common people will be lost in an ocean of evidence they do not understand.
Throughout the history of Islamic thought, these two concepts have been a field of fierce debate. There are groups who claim that the door of ijtihad has been closed since the fourth century Hijri. There are also groups on the opposite extreme, opening the door of ijtihad as wide as possible until everyone feels entitled to determine the law according to their own whims. Both extremes are equally mistaken and equally dangerous.
Hizbut Tahrir, through the fundamental works of Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani — especially in Asy-Syakhshiyyah Al-Islamiyyah Volume 3 — offers a clear, methodological, and intellectually satisfying approach. This approach is not trapped in the romance of the past that claims the generation after the imams of the schools were no longer capable of ijtihad. Yet it also does not fall into the liberalism of thought that allows anyone, even those without scholarly equipment, to play with the law of Allah.
Let us systematically untangle this issue, so that we understand precisely where our position is as Muslims living in the modern era, and how we should respond to the laws of Allah that are continuously needed by life.
1. The Intellect and Its Limits: Why the Shari’ah Needs a Mechanism for Excavating Law
The Qur’an and the Sunnah have indeed descended completely and perfectly. Not a single issue of life escapes the guidance of both. However, those sacred texts do not come in the form of a neatly arranged code book article by article like modern laws. The verses of law in the Qur’an are relatively few in number — scholars count around five hundred ayat ahkam (verses of law) out of a total of more than six thousand verses. The hadiths directly related to law are also scattered among thousands of other hadiths, and not all of them have the same degree of authenticity.
This is where a fundamental need arises: how to connect the sacred texts, limited in number, with the realities of life, unlimited in variety?
The human intellect needs a method to excavate the law from those sources. This method is what, in the terminology of ushul fiqh, is called Istinbath al-Ahkam (excavation of law). And the person who carries out this process of istinbath earnestly, using his entire scholarly capacity, is called a Mujtahid. The process he carries out is called Ijtihad.
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani in Asy-Syakhshiyyah Al-Islamiyyah Volume 3 asserts that ijtihad is not an option that may be left behind. It is a collective obligation (fardhu kifayah) that must exist in every generation of the Muslim ummah. If there is not a single mujtahid in a certain era, then the entire ummah is sinful. Why? Because without ijtihad, the shari’ah cannot be applied to new issues. And without applying the shari’ah to new issues, Islam loses its function as shalih li kulli zaman wa makan — relevant for every time and place.
Allah ﷻ says:
وَمَا أَنْزَلْنَا عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ إِلَّا لِتُبَيِّنَ لَهُمُ الَّذِي اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ ۖ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةً لِقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ
“And We have not revealed to you the Book, [O Muhammad], except for you to make clear to them that wherein they have differed and as guidance and mercy for a people who believe.” (QS. An-Nahl: 64)
This verse explicitly states that the function of the Qur’an is to explain (litubayyina) — and this process of explanation requires earnest intellectual effort, namely ijtihad.
However, it must be understood very clearly: ijtihad does not create a new law. Ijtihad only discovers the law that already exists in the adillah asy-syara’ (evidences of the shari’ah). The mujtahid is like an archaeologist who excavates an artifact already buried in the ground. The artifact already existed before it was excavated. The archaeologist did not create it; he only uncovered it from beneath the layers of soil. Likewise the mujtahid: the law of Allah already exists in the Qur’an and the Sunnah; the mujtahid only strives to uncover it so that it can be understood and practiced.
2. The Definition of Ijtihad: What Actually Happens When a Scholar Performs Ijtihad
الِاجْتِهَادُ: هُوَ بَذْلُ الْفَقِيهِ وُسْعَهُ لِاسْتِنْبَاطِ الْحُكْمِ الشَّرْعِيِّ مِنَ الْأَدِلَّةِ الشَّرْعِيَّةِ
“Ijtihad is the exertion of all capability by a faqih (jurist) to excavate the shari’ ruling from the shari’ evidences.”
This definition contains several very important elements that must not be overlooked.
First, ijtihad is the exertion of all capability (bazlu al-wus’i). This is not a casual activity that can be done in passing. Ijtihad demands that a scholar exert all his intellectual potential, drain all his scholarly reserves, and work with extraordinary earnestness. A mujtahid must trace the Qur’an verse by verse, hadith by hadith, understand the context of its revelation, analyze the strength of the evidence, compare one narration with another, and apply the strict rules of ushul fiqh.
Second, the one who performs ijtihad must be a faqih. Not just anyone who can read the Qur’an then claims to be capable of excavating the law. Ijtihad requires very high and very specific scholarly competence.
Third, what is excavated is the shari’ ruling. Not the law of reason, not customary law, not man-made positive law. What is sought is the law that comes from Allah ﷻ through the adillah asy-syara’.
Fourth, the source of excavation is the adillah asy-syara’. Ijtihad may not be sourced from personal desire, from political pressure, from social trends, or from economic interests. The only valid source is the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the Ijma’ of the Companions, and Qiyas — in accordance with the method of istinbath established by ushul fiqh.
Allah ﷻ says:
فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ
“So ask the people of the message if you do not know.” (QS. An-Nahl: 43)
This verse contains two meanings at once. On one hand, it commands the common people to ask the people of knowledge — this is the basis of taqlid. On the other hand, it alludes to the existence of “the people of dhikr” (ahl adz-dzikr) who have the capacity to provide answers based on their knowledge — and that knowledge is obtained through the process of ijtihad.
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ also gave a stern warning against those who dare to issue fatwas without possessing competence:
مَنْ أُفْتِيَ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ كَانَ إِثْمُهُ عَلَى مَنْ أَفْتَاهُ
“Whoever is given a fatwa without knowledge, then the sin of it is upon the one who gave the fatwa.” (HR. Abu Dawud and Ibnu Majah)
This hadith shows that issuing fatwas — which is the fruit of ijtihad — is a very serious matter and very dangerous if done by someone who is not competent.
3. The Conditions of a Mujtahid: A Door Not Open to Everyone
Not everyone is allowed to perform ijtihad. This is a principle agreed upon by all scholars of ushul fiqh, including Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani. Ijtihad is not a democratic right that can be claimed by anyone. It requires very strict and very specific scholarly qualifications.
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani in Asy-Syakhshiyyah Al-Islamiyyah Volume 3 details the conditions of a mujtahid as follows:
First, mastering the Arabic language in depth. A mujtahid must understand nahwu (grammar), sharf (morphology), balaghah (rhetoric), and other Arabic sciences. Why? Because the Qur’an was revealed in Arabic, and the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ was also conveyed in Arabic. Without deep mastery of Arabic, a scholar will not be able to understand the nuances of meaning, the difference between ‘am (general) and khas (specific), between mutlaq (absolute) and muqayyad (qualified), between haqiqah and majaz, between a command that is obligatory and one that is recommended.
Second, mastering the Qur’an and the sciences related to it. A mujtahid must know the ayat ahkam (verses of law), asbabun nuzul (reasons for revelation), nasikh and mansukh (abrogating and abrogated verses), as well as reliable commentaries. He must be able to distinguish between verses that are general and those that are specific, between verses that are absolute and those that are qualified.
Third, mastering the Sunnah and the sciences of hadith. A mujtahid must be able to distinguish between sahih, hasan, and da’if hadiths. He must understand the science of jarh wa ta’dil (criticism of hadith narrators), know the asbabul wurud (reasons for the coming of hadiths), and understand the historical context of every hadith he uses as evidence.
Fourth, mastering the science of ushul fiqh. This is the science of the rules of istinbath — how to excavate the law from evidence. Without ushul fiqh, a scholar is like an architect who does not understand the principles of building structure: he may be able to assemble evidences, but he does not know how to draw a valid legal conclusion from those evidences.
Fifth, knowing the ijma’ (consensus of the scholars). A mujtahid must know the issues already agreed upon by the scholars so that he does not issue an opinion that contradicts the ijma’. If he performs ijtihad on an issue where there is already an ijma’, then his ijtihad is invalid and rejected.
Sixth, understanding the reality (waqi’) that becomes the object of the law. Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani greatly emphasizes this aspect. A mujtahid is not enough to master the adillah asy-syara’. He must also understand in depth the reality of the issue to which he will give a ruling. How can a scholar judge the ruling of cryptocurrency if he does not understand what blockchain is, what decentralization is, and how the transaction mechanism works within it? How can a scholar give a ruling on test-tube babies if he does not understand the process of in vitro fertilization?
Table 1: The Conditions of a Mujtahid According to Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani
| Condition | Reason for Need | Consequence if Not Fulfilled |
|---|---|---|
| Arabic Language | The Qur’an and Sunnah are in Arabic | Misunderstanding the meaning of evidence |
| Qur’anic Sciences | The first source of law | Not knowing nasikh-mansukh, asbabun nuzul |
| Hadith Sciences | The second source of law | Using da’if hadiths as evidence |
| Ushul Fiqh | The method of excavating law | Unable to draw a valid conclusion |
| Knowledge of Ijma’ | Protecting from deviation | Issuing an opinion already agreed upon |
| Understanding Waqi’ | Applying the law to reality | Misapplying evidence to the wrong context |
These conditions are very heavy. It is no wonder that the number of mujtahids in every generation is very few. And this is the logical basis why the majority of the Muslim ummah — even in the golden age of Islam — were in the position of taqlid, that is, following the opinions of the mujtahids without knowing the detailed evidence behind those opinions.
4. First Analogy: The Gold Miner and the Jewelry Wearer
To understand the relation between ijtihad and taqlid, let us use a rich and deep analogy.
Imagine the shari’ah of Allah is like a layer of pure gold stored deep in the bowels of the earth. The gold exists — real, valuable, and needed by mankind. But the gold does not appear by itself on the surface of the ground. It must be dug, mined, sifted, and forged so that it can become beneficial jewelry.
The Mujtahid is the expert gold miner. He has complete tools: a geological map (ushul fiqh), hammer and chisel (Arabic language and tafsir), gold sifter (hadith sciences), and a smelting furnace (understanding of reality). He spends years learning how to mine, training under the guidance of senior miners, and honing his expertise until he is able to distinguish between pure gold and ordinary stone that merely shines like gold.
When this miner finds gold, he does not create it. The gold already existed in the ground millions of years ago. What he does is uncover the gold from beneath the layers of rock and soil, clean it from dirt, and forge it into jewelry that can be used.
The Muqallid — the common person who follows (taqlid) — is the jewelry wearer. He does not have mining expertise. He does not have a geological map. He does not know how to distinguish pure gold from fake gold. But he needs that gold for the jewelry of his life: for prayer, for trade, for marriage, for social interaction with others.
What does the jewelry wearer do? He trusts the expert gold miner. He believes that the gold given by the miner is real gold, not brass painted yellow. He does not need to understand the mining process to be able to wear the jewelry. What he needs is the belief that the source of the jewelry is trustworthy.
The question: is the jewelry wearer foolish because he cannot mine himself? Of course not. He is wise because he knows the limits of his capability and he entrusts matters beyond his expertise to the experts. Indeed, the foolish one is the person who recklessly mines on his own without knowledge, without tools, without training — then claims that the ordinary stone he found by the river is pure gold.
Such is taqlid. A common person who follows a competent mujtahid is not a foolish or lazy thinker. He is a person who is wise and realistic: he knows that ijtihad requires expertise he does not possess, and he chooses to follow the opinion of the person who possesses that expertise. This is a rational, praiseworthy attitude, and in accordance with the command of Allah in QS. An-Nahl: 43.
5. Taqlid: The Obligation of the One Who Is Not a Mujtahid
التَّقْلِيدُ: هُوَ اتِّبَاعُ قَوْلِ غَيْرِنَا مِنْ غَيْرِ حُجَّةٍ
“Taqlid is following the statement of someone else without knowing the evidence (hujjah) behind that statement.”
It needs to be emphasized from the outset: in the terminology of ushul fiqh of Hizbut Tahrir, taqlid is not something absolutely blameworthy. Taqlid is only blameworthy if done in matters of aqidah (ushuluddin), because aqidah must be based on personal conviction born from understanding and clear evidence. However, in matters of furu’ (branches of law, fiqh), taqlid is permissible and even obligatory for the one who is not a mujtahid.
Why is it obligatory? Because Allah ﷻ does not burden a soul beyond its capacity:
لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا
“Allah does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity.” (QS. Al-Baqarah: 286)
If ijtihad requires very heavy scholarly conditions — mastering Arabic, the Qur’an, hadith, ushul fiqh, ijma’, and understanding of reality — then it is clear that the majority of the Muslim ummah does not have the capacity for ijtihad. Forcing them to perform ijtihad is like forcing a patient to operate on himself without medical knowledge. That is not justice. That is oppression.
Therefore, Allah gives a concession: the one who is incapable of ijtihad is commanded to follow (taqlid) the one who is capable. This is the meaning of QS. An-Nahl: 43: “So ask the people of the message if you do not know.”
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani in Asy-Syakhshiyyah Al-Islamiyyah Volume 3 explains that taqlid in matters of fiqh has several levels:
First, common taqlid. This is taqlid done by someone who has no scholarly foundation in fiqh whatsoever. He asks a scholar or teacher he trusts, then he practices the answer without knowing the evidence. This is the most basic and most common form of taqlid.
Second, student taqlid. This is taqlid done by someone who is studying fiqh. He has begun to understand basic evidences, but does not yet have the capacity to perform istinbath independently. He still follows the opinion of the scholar, but while studying the reasons behind that opinion.
Third, ittiba’. This is a level higher than taqlid. In ittiba’, a person follows the opinion of a scholar while knowing the evidence that becomes the basis of that opinion. He is not merely following blindly, but he understands why the scholar holds that opinion. Ittiba’ is a highly recommended middle path, because it combines obedience to the scholars with understanding of the evidence.
Table 2: Levels of Following the Opinion of Scholars
| Level | Definition | Level of Knowledge | Example Attitude |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taqlid | Following without knowing the evidence | Common | ”Teacher A says it is haram, I follow.” |
| Ittiba’ | Following while knowing the evidence | Intermediate | ”Teacher A says it is haram because of evidence X, and I understand that evidence.” |
| Ijtihad | Excavating the law oneself from the evidence | Mujtahid | ”I researched the evidences and concluded the ruling is haram.” |
It should be noted that ittiba’ is more excellent than taqlid, but taqlid remains valid and still fulfills the obligation. Not every Muslim must rise to the level of ittiba’, let alone to the level of ijtihad. What is important is that he follows the opinion of a competent and trustworthy scholar.
6. Misconception: “The Door of Ijtihad is Closed”
One of the most famous — and most misleading — claims in the history of Islamic thought is the statement that “the door of ijtihad has been closed” since the fourth century Hijri. This claim was put forward by some scholars from the Shafi’i and Hanbali schools, and was then widely adopted by many circles until it became a kind of dogma that may not be questioned.
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani refutes this claim with very strong and very rational arguments.
First, there is no shari’ evidence stating that the door of ijtihad is closed. Not a single verse of the Qur’an or hadith of the Prophet ﷺ says that ijtihad will stop at a certain time. Ijtihad is a fardhu kifayah — a collective obligation that must exist in every generation. If the door of ijtihad is closed, then this fardhu kifayah is nullified, and that contradicts the fundamental principles of the shari’ah.
Second, the claim that “the door of ijtihad is closed” contradicts historical reality. Even after the fourth century Hijri, there were still many scholars who performed ijtihad and produced new opinions not identical to the opinions of their school imams. Imam An-Nawawi (d. 676 H), Imam As-Suyuthi (d. 911 H), and many other scholars continued to perform ijtihad within the framework of their schools.
Third, this claim contradicts the need of the ummah. New issues continue to emerge in every era. If ijtihad stops, then the shari’ah cannot answer these new issues. And if the shari’ah cannot answer new issues, then Islam loses its function as a comprehensive way of life.
Fourth, what actually happened was not “the door of ijtihad is closed,” but rather “the stagnation of thought in some circles.” Some scholars felt satisfied with what had been excavated by their school imams and did not feel the need to perform further ijtihad. This is a personal attitude, not a shari’ determination. This attitude may be praiseworthy from the standpoint of humility, but it cannot be used as a basis to close the door of ijtihad altogether.
Hizbut Tahrir emphasizes that the door of ijtihad will remain open until the Day of Judgment. As long as the Qur’an and the Sunnah still exist, as long as the rules of ushul fiqh are still understood, and as long as there are scholars who fulfill the conditions of ijtihad, then ijtihad will continue. What is needed is not to open a door that is “closed” — because that door was never closed — but rather to produce scholars who fulfill the conditions to perform ijtihad.
Allah ﷻ says:
وَلْتَكُنْ مِنْكُمْ أُمَّةٌ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
“And let there be [arising] from you a nation inviting to [all that is] good, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, and those will be the successful.” (QS. Ali ‘Imran: 104)
This verse uses the mudhari’ form (present-future verb) — yad’uuna, ya’muruuna, yanhawna — showing that the activities of da’wah, enjoining good, and forbidding evil must continue continuously. And these activities cannot be done without continuous ijtihad as well.
7. Second Analogy: The Flowing River and the Dam that Blocks
To further understand why the claim “the door of ijtihad is closed” is mistaken, let us use a second analogy.
Imagine Islamic shari’ah is like a great river flowing from a spring in the mountains. The spring is the Qur’an and the Sunnah — two sources that never dry up, never run out, and never lose their purity. Water from that source flows continuously, passing through valleys, irrigating fields, and giving life to everything along its course.
Ijtihad is the process that ensures the river water continues to flow to new areas that need it. When civilization develops and new settlements emerge along the river, new channels are needed so that water can reach those settlements. These new channels are the new ijtihads that excavate the law for new issues.
Now, imagine there is a group of people who come and say: “This river is enough flowing to the areas that exist now. There is no need to make new channels anymore. The door to make new channels has been closed.”
What will happen? New areas that emerge later will dry up. New fields will not be irrigated. New settlements will die because they do not get water. Yet the spring in the mountains is still flowing heavily — its water has not decreased, has not run out, has not changed. The problem is not the source of the water, but rather the attitude of the people who refuse to make new channels.
Such is Islamic shari’ah. The Qur’an and the Sunnah have never lost their ability to answer new issues. The problem is when some circles claim that ijtihad — the channel that connects the source of the shari’ah with new realities — is no longer needed.
However, it also needs to be understood that this analogy has its limits. A river that flows freely without control can become a destructive flood. Likewise, ijtihad done without rules, without conditions, without correct methodology, can produce a “law” that is not actually the law of Allah, but rather the law of desire wrapped in misunderstood evidences.
Therefore, ijtihad must be done within the strict flow of ushul fiqh rules, just as river water must flow within directed channels so as not to become a destructive flood. Correct ijtihad is ijtihad that is bound by evidence, bound by rules, and bound by correct understanding of the Arabic language and reality.
8. Ijtihad in the Modern Era: Who Is Allowed to Perform Ijtihad Today?
This is a very important and very practical question. If we accept that the door of ijtihad remains open, then who is allowed to perform ijtihad in the modern era? Is everyone who holds a doctorate in Islamic studies allowed to perform ijtihad? Is every popular teacher on social media entitled to issue fatwas?
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani gives a firm answer: the only ones allowed to perform ijtihad are those who fulfill all the conditions of a mujtahid mentioned above. Academic titles, popularity, or position do not automatically make someone a mujtahid. What determines it is specific and very strict scholarly competence.
In the modern era, the challenges of ijtihad are becoming increasingly complex. A mujtahid today must not only master the traditional shari’ sciences. He must also understand modern realities in depth — digital economics, biotechnology, artificial intelligence, international law, geopolitics, and so on. Without adequate understanding of reality, ijtihad will produce a law that is irrelevant or even dangerous.
Therefore, Hizbut Tahrir emphasizes the importance of collaboration between shari’ scholars and experts in their respective fields. A mujtahid who wants to rule on cryptocurrency must consult with blockchain technology experts. A mujtahid who wants to rule on test-tube babies must consult with reproduction experts. A mujtahid who wants to rule on the modern banking system must consult with economics and finance experts.
This does not mean the mujtahid surrenders the legal decision to non-shari’ experts. The legal decision remains in the hands of the mujtahid based on the adillah asy-syara’. But understanding the reality of the object of the law — which is a condition of ijtihad — requires the help of the experts.
Table 3: Examples of Contemporary Ijtihad Requiring Collaboration
| Modern Issue | Shari’ Sciences Needed | Non-Shari’ Sciences Needed |
|---|---|---|
| Cryptocurrency | Fiqh of mu’amalah, riba, gharar | Blockchain technology, crypto market mechanisms |
| Test-tube babies | Fiqh of marriage, lineage, inheritance | Reproduction, in vitro fertilization, embryology |
| Artificial intelligence | Fiqh of criminal law, witnesses, responsibility | Machine learning, AI system autonomy |
| Banking system | Fiqh of mu’amalah, riba, mudharabah | Macroeconomics, monetary policy, financial derivatives |
Hizbut Tahrir also emphasizes that contemporary ijtihad must be based on maqashid asy-syari’ah (the objectives of the shari’ah): protecting religion (hifzh ad-din), protecting life (hifzh an-nafs), protecting the intellect (hifzh al-‘aql), protecting lineage (hifzh an-nasl), and protecting wealth (hifzh al-mal). Every ijtihad that contradicts these maqashid must be rejected, because it is not correct ijtihad.
9. Tabanni: When the State Adopts One Opinion from Many Opinions
In social and state life, differences of opinion among mujtahids are an inevitability. And differences of opinion themselves are not a problem as long as they remain within the framework of adillah asy-syara’ and correct ushul fiqh rules. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
إِذَا حَكَمَ الْحَاكِمُ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَصَابَ فَلَهُ أَجْرَانِ، وَإِذَا حَكَمَ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَخْطَأَ فَلَهُ أَجْرٌ
“If a judge judges and strives to reach the correct conclusion (ijtihad) and is right, he will have two rewards. If he judges and strives to reach the correct conclusion but is wrong, he will have one reward.” (HR. Bukhari-Muslim)
This hadith shows that a mujtahid who is wrong still receives reward. Differences of opinion among mujtahids are a mercy, not a disaster.
However, in the context of law enforcement by the state — especially in the Islamic Khilafah — differences of opinion cannot be left unchecked without a mechanism for resolution. Imagine if every judge throughout the Khilafah applied his own opinion in the same case. Person A in Baghdad is acquitted, while person B in Damascus is sentenced for the exact same case. This would create legal chaos, injustice, and loss of legal certainty.
This is where the concept of Tabanni becomes very important.
التَّبَنِّي: هُوَ اخْتِيَارُ الْحَاكِمِ (الْخَلِيفَةِ) رَأْيًا مُعَيَّنًا مِنَ الْآرَاءِ الْمُجْتَهِدَةِ لِيَكُونَ قَانُونًا يُطَبَّقُ فِي الدَّوْلَةِ
“Tabanni is when the ruler (the Khalifah) chooses a specific opinion from the mujtahid opinions to be made into a law applied throughout the state.”
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani in Asy-Syakhshiyyah Al-Islamiyyah Volume 3 explains that the Khalifah has the authority to perform tabanni — that is, to choose one opinion from several different mujtahid opinions, then make it the official state law that must be implemented by all judges and all citizens.
Why does the Khalifah have the right to perform tabanni? Because he is the leader responsible for order, justice, and the unity of the ummah. If differences of opinion begin to disturb public order, disturb the unity of the ummah’s movement, or create legal uncertainty, then the Khalifah is obliged to choose one opinion that he considers to have the strongest evidence and be most in accordance with the welfare of the ummah.
Analogy of the Great Ship
Imagine the Muslim ummah as a great ship sailing on the ocean. This ship has many commanders, each with a different opinion about the direction that must be taken. Commander A wants to go north, Commander B wants to go south, Commander C wants to go east. If every commander is given the freedom to steer his own ship, then the ship will spin around aimlessly, wasting fuel, and eventually sinking.
Tabanni is the mechanism that makes one commander — namely the Khalifah — the determiner of direction. He chooses one correct direction, and the entire crew of the ship is obliged to follow that direction. Not because the other directions are absolutely wrong, but because the ship needs one clear direction in order to reach its destination.
It is important to understand: tabanni does not cancel the other opinions that are not chosen. Those opinions remain valid as valid ijtihad opinions. What happens is only that for the purposes of state enforcement, one opinion is chosen so that legal certainty and unity are created.
Sheikh Taqiyuddin an-Nabhani also explains that tabanni only applies to laws that will be enforced by the state (such as criminal law, civil law, economic law). For ‘ibadah mahdhah (prayer, fasting, hajj), the Khalifah does not perform tabanni because every Muslim is free to follow the opinion he believes in regarding his personal worship.
10. Conclusion: Ijtihad and Taqlid as Pillars of Islamic Personality
The correct understanding of ijtihad and taqlid is not merely academic knowledge floating in university lecture halls. It is a practical aqidah that shapes how a Muslim thinks, behaves, and interacts with the laws of Allah in daily life.
When a Muslim truly understands and embeds the concepts of ijtihad and taqlid within himself, an Islamic personality (Syakhshiyyah Islamiyah) with the following characteristics will be born:
First, he respects knowledge and scholars. He knows that the law of Allah cannot be excavated arbitrarily. He respects the mujtahids who have spent decades studying the Qur’an, the Sunnah, the Arabic language, and ushul fiqh. He does not belittle the opinion of a scholar merely because that opinion does not suit his desire. He also does not claim himself to be a mujtahid if he does not fulfill the conditions.
Second, he is not blindly fanatical to one school. He respects all mu’tabar schools and understands that differences of opinion among mujtahids are a mercy, not a disaster. He does not curse scholars of other schools and does not consider his own school as the only one absolutely correct. However, he also does not hop from school to school merely to seek the easiest — an attitude that in fiqh is called talfiq which is blameworthy.
Third, he actively understands the evidence (ittiba’). Although he follows taqlid, he is not satisfied with taqlid alone. He strives to study the evidences behind the opinion he follows. He reads, asks questions, and learns so that his taqlid rises to become ittiba’ — following with understanding. This is a highly recommended attitude because it makes his faith stand on the foundation of knowledge, not on blind following.
Fourth, he supports contemporary ijtihad. He realizes that the Muslim ummah needs new mujtahids capable of answering modern issues. He supports efforts to produce scholars who fulfill the conditions of ijtihad. He is not trapped in the romance of the past that claims the current generation is no longer capable of ijtihad.
Fifth, he understands the concept of tabanni and accepts it as a state need. He knows that in the Islamic Khilafah, the Khalifah has the right to choose one opinion to be made into law. He does not reject that law merely because he personally follows the opinion of a different mujtahid. He understands that tabanni is a necessary mechanism to maintain order, justice, and the unity of the ummah.
This is the beautiful balance in Islam. On one hand, the shari’ah remains pure because every law must be sourced from adillah asy-syara’ and excavated through strict ushul fiqh rules. On the other hand, the shari’ah remains fresh and relevant because the door of ijtihad is always open and continuously connects the source of the shari’ah with the ever-evolving realities of life.
Allah ﷻ says:
الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا
“This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion.” (QS. Al-Ma’idah: 3)
The perfection of religion that Allah declares in this verse is not a static and frozen perfection. It is a dynamic perfection — a perfection that encompasses complete sources of the shari’ah, valid methods of excavating law, and flexible mechanisms of application. Ijtihad and taqlid are two sides of the same coin: both are needed so that Islam remains a religion that is perfect, relevant, and capable of guiding mankind toward happiness in this world and in the Hereafter.
رَبَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَفِي الْآخِرَةِ حَسَنَةً وَقِنَا عَذَابَ النَّارِ
“Our Lord, give us in this world [that which is] good and in the Hereafter [that which is] good and protect us from the punishment of the Fire.” (QS. Al-Baqarah: 201)
Related Material: