An essay from 14th century CE.
Translator claims ”I was inexperienced when I translated it and it shows”, and translator is right over here. A difficult translation to comprehend the text.
Author makes a case for Taqleed(following a school of thought strictly).
Rebutting to objections:
1-> How can people be restricted to the opinions of designated scholars, and be barred from ijtihād or imitating one of the other scholars of the religion?
2-> The difference between restricting people to 1 mode of recitation by Hazrat Uthman and restricting people to opinions of the four Imāms is not the same. Since meanings of those seven modes of recitation are said to be identical, while Imams have differences.
3-> Its understandable to prevent general masses from doing ijtihād. But why prevent following an imitated, mujtahid Imām, outside of those famous 4 Imāms!
4-> What about Imam Ahmed saying: “Do not record my words, nor the words of so-and-so and so-and-so. Instead, learn as we learned.”
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم would seek protection from knowledge of no benefit. He said, “Ask for beneficial knowledge, and seek protection from knowledge which does not benefit.”
Verily, there is a kind of knowledge that is [nothing but pure] ignorance.
He disliked frequent, longwinded talk, and loved concision.
Personally, the idea of following 1 school of thought strictly doesnt sits in, maybe because I am not feeling the sensitivity of it, need more data and have to see both sides of it further.
The arguments of author didn’t suffice to change or form my mind.