Is the Opinion of the Majority (Jumhur) a Binding Proof?
By Dr. Muhammad Akram Nadwi
[Source
Note: This is a direct English rendering of the article by Dr. Muhammad
Akram Nadwi. The content has been translated faithfully into English with
grammatical refinement, without interpretive additions.]
Some matters are so baseless that no serious and occupied
person wishes to waste time discussing them. One such notion, however, has been
circulating on social media for several years: “The opinion of the majority is
a binding proof,” “Opposing the majority is misguidance,” “Truth depends upon
the opinion of the majority,” “Whoever departs from the way of the majority
risks losing his faith,” and similar statements.
I continued ignoring such claims, considering them unworthy
of attention, assuming they were merely another wave of nonsense common on
social media. Coincidentally, today, a similar post was shared in a WhatsApp
group. As usual, I ignored it. Suddenly, a respected scholar directed the
discussion toward me. These days, life is so busy that one naturally avoids
such futile matters. Yet I thought that if scholars themselves have begun
treating such falsehoods as worthy of consideration, then a remedy has become
necessary; otherwise, a new innovation may take root in religion.
In both Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, there is a
narration from Aisha bint Abi Bakr in which the Prophet ﷺ said: “Whoever introduces into this matter
of ours something that does not belong to it, it is rejected.”
Out of fear that this irrational idea may become part of
God’s pure religion, I have decided to put these thoughts into writing. May
Allah grant us all the ability to follow the truth.
The question posed in the title of this article can be fully
answered by dividing the discussion into three sections:
- The
obligatory/practical response
- The
cause of the confusion
- The
scholarly/research-based response
1. The Practical Response
Those who repeatedly raise this issue are generally
followers of one of the four schools of jurisprudence — Hanafi, Maliki,
Shafi‘i, or Hanbali. Since the majority in the Indian subcontinent are Hanafis,
examples will be drawn from the Hanafi school.
The first question to such people is: if the opinion of the
majority is truly a binding proof, then what justification remains for
following the Hanafi school? In every issue, you should act upon the opinion
held by the majority.
According to Abu Hanifa, the time of Zuhr prayer ends when
the shadow becomes twice the object’s length, whereas the majority of jurists
and hadith scholars hold that it ends at the first shadow length. If the
majority’s opinion is truly binding, then fairness demands abandoning Imam Abu
Hanifa’s opinion and following the majority.
Similarly:
- Imam
Abu Hanifa considered Witr obligatory, while the majority regard it as
Sunnah.
- Hanafi
books mention four non-emphasized Sunnah rak‘ahs before ‘Isha, whereas no
such practice is authentically reported from the Companions, the
Successors, or the four Imams.
- Imam
Abu Hanifa held that the opening Takbir is valid with any phrase
glorifying God, while the majority disagree.
- According
to Imam Abu Hanifa, intention is not a condition for the validity of
ablution, while the majority say that ablution without intention is invalid.
- Imam
Abu Hanifa considered purification during Tawaf obligatory, whereas the
majority considered it a condition.
- Imam
Abu Hanifa allowed a woman’s marriage without a guardian, while the
majority require a guardian.
Every school contains hundreds of such issues where the
majority opinion was not followed. If the majority’s opinion were obligatory,
why would these schools insist upon their own views?
2. The Cause of the Confusion
The confusion arises because these people fail to
distinguish between narration and opinion.
If a hadith is transmitted through a connected chain of
trustworthy narrators, and another hadith with a sound chain exists in
opposition to it, then which narration receives preference?
The agreed position of scholars is that the narration whose
transmitters possess stronger precision and reliability is preferred. If both
chains are equal in precision, then preference is determined by supporting
chains and multiplicity of transmission. The stronger narration is called محفوظ
(preserved), and the weaker one شاذ (anomalous).
Thus, in matters of narration, the number of transmitters
can sometimes become a factor of preference.
But opinions are different.
In matters of opinion, preference depends upon the strength
of evidence. The opinion supported by stronger evidence is stronger; the one
supported by weaker evidence remains weak. Even if the entire world votes in
favor of the weaker opinion, it still remains weak and anomalous.
3. The Scholarly Response
The claim that “the opinion of the majority is a binding
proof” contradicts:
- the
Qur’an,
- the
Sunnah,
- the
consensus of the Muslim Ummah,
- reason
itself,
- and
the continuous scholarly practice of Muslim jurists across generations.
The Qur’an repeatedly makes obedience to Allah and His
Messenger obligatory. For example: “O
you who believe! Obey Allah, obey the Messenger, and those in authority among
you.” — Qur’an 4:59
Based upon such verses, the Ummah unanimously agreed that:
- The
first proof is the Book of Allah.
- The
second proof is the Sunnah of the Messenger.
Obedience to those in authority exists under obedience to
Allah and His Messenger.
Then Allah says: “If
you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and the Messenger.”
Meaning: when scholars or authorities differ, the matter
must be referred back to the Qur’an and Sunnah. The view most consistent with
them is the stronger view.
The Qur’an commands decisions based upon evidence —
not numbers. In
fact, the Qur’an strongly indicates that if the majority’s opinion lacks
evidence, rejecting it becomes obligatory, and blindly following the majority
without proof becomes misguidance.
The Prophet ﷺ also emphasized this principle. In Sahih Muslim, Jabir ibn Abd
Allah narrates:
“I leave among you that which, if you hold firmly to it,
you will never go astray after me: the Book of Allah.”
A narration in Al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn also mentions
the Sunnah alongside it.
The famous hadith of Muadh ibn Jabal likewise directs people
first to the Book of Allah, then to the Sunnah of the Messenger, and thereafter
to analogy (Qiyas).
Some narrations also command adherence to the Sunnah of the
rightly guided caliphs. Yet no hadith states that, in cases of disagreement,
the majority opinion becomes automatically authoritative.
From the era of the Companions onward, all jurists, hadith
scholars, and scholars generally agreed that the proofs are the Qur’an and
Sunnah.
Most jurists — except the Zahiris — also accepted consensus
(Ijma‘) and analogy (Qiyas) as legal proofs. But no jurist ever declared the
opinion of the majority itself to be an independent proof.
The books of Usul al-Fiqh from the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i,
and Hanbali schools exist in abundance. They count consensus as proof, but none
considers the majority opinion itself a proof.
Reason also dictates that the correct view is the one
supported by evidence. A claim without evidence remains weak, even if the
entire world supports it.
This is why democracy itself is not considered proof of
truth.
Many beliefs once universally accepted by nations were later
disproven by scientific inquiry.
Even members of Tablighi Jamaat repeatedly emphasize this
point. During their consultations, it is specifically stated that the Amir is
not bound to decide according to majority opinion.
The historical practice of jurists clearly proves that the
majority’s opinion is not binding proof.
If you study the books of all schools and the commentaries
on hadith, you will repeatedly find statements such as “this is the opinion of
the majority,” yet no jurist treats majority agreement itself as evidence.
Rather, those opposing the majority present proofs for their position.
This clearly demonstrates that evidence is what matters —
not numbers.
Otherwise, anyone opposing the majority would have been
obligated to abandon his view merely because he stood in the minority. Yet no
scholar ever abandoned his position solely because the majority disagreed.
If the Hanafis began blindly following the majority, the
Hanafi school itself would disappear.
Conclusion
Calling people to follow the majority is an unacademic and
irrational call. The invitation should always be toward following evidence.
In this religion, the universally agreed proofs are the
Qur’an and Sunnah. Other disputed proofs also exist, foremost among them
consensus and analogy.
Whenever a person presents an opinion, he is obligated to
support it with evidence from these sources.
Merely chanting “majority,
majority” in place of evidence is manifest misguidance. It effectively declares
the Companions, the Successors, the four Imams, and all jurists and hadith
scholars to have been mistaken.
Arranged by:
Aamir I. Yazdani
MPhil Islamic Thought & Civilization (PAKISTAN)
MSc Irrigation Engineering (UK)
No comments:
Post a Comment