The Way of SUNNI Islam

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

The Way of Sunni Islam:


Islam, Iman, and Ihsan

Sidi Hamza Karamali




‘Umar ibn al-Khattab said:

As we sat one day with the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace), a man in pure white clothing and jet black hair came to us, without a trace of travelling upon him, though none of us knew him.

He sat down before the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) bracing his knees against his, resting his hands on his legs, and said: "Muhammad, tell me about Islam." The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: "Islam is to testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and to perform the prayer, give zakat, fast in Ramadan, and perform the pilgrimage to the House if you can find a way."

He said: "You have spoken the truth," and we were surprised that he should ask and then confirm the answer. Then he said: "Tell me about true faith (iman)," and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) answered: "It is to believe in Allah, His angels, His inspired Books, His messengers, the Last Day, and in destiny, its good and evil."

"You have spoken the truth," he said, "Now tell me about the perfection of faith (ihsan)," and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) answered: "It is to worship Allah as if you see Him, and if you see Him not, He nevertheless sees you."

He said: "Now tell me about the Hour." The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) answered: "The one who is asked about it does knows no more than the questioner."

He said: "Then tell me about its signs." The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace answered: "That a slave girl shall give birth to her mistress, and that you see barefoot, naked, destitute shepherds vying to build tall buildings."

Then the visitor left. I waited a long while, and the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said to me, "Do you know, ‘Umar, who was the questioner?" and I replied, "Allah and His messenger know best." He said,

"It was Gabriel, who came to you to teach you your religion"


(Sahih Muslim, 1.37: hadith 8).








This is a rigorously authenticated hadith, described by Imam Nawawi as one of the hadiths upon which the Islamic religion turns. The use of the word "religion" (din) the last words of it, "came to you to teach you your religion" entails that the religion of Islam is composed of the three fundamentals mentioned in the hadith:

Islam, or external compliance with what Allah asks of us;

Iman, or the belief in the unseen that the prophets have informed us of;

and Ihsan, or to worship Allah as though one sees Him.




Sunni Islam, or Ahl al-Sunna wa’l-Jama‘ah, understands the Islamic religion as it has been passed down in an unbroken chain of transmission from teacher to student from the time of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) until today.



The way of Sunni Islam is to take the branch of Islam from living jurists who follow one of the four Sunni schools of fiqh: the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali schools;

the branch of Iman from living scholars belonging to one of the two Sunni schools of ‘aqida: the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools;

and the branch of Ihsan from living masters of one of the many Sufi orders that have emerged over the centuries, such as the Qadiri, Naqshbandi, Shadhili, Chishti, and Rifa‘i tariqas.

[japanz]

i still wonder why Islam split into many sects. there should not be any sunni mosque or wabahi mosque like christianity does.

[AbuMubarak]

i have to become acquainted with some of the newbies before i start, so for now, i will just keep an eye on them

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Assalamu alaykum Muslims, Peace to the Non Muslims,

This is the Way of Sunni Islam. If any have any doubts I would advise two excellent websites:

www.sunnipath.com

www.masud.co.uk

Wasalam.

[AbuMubarak]

madh'habs?

is this the way of islam?

[Huja Usman]

Originally posted by Sunni
Assalamu alaykum Muslims, Peace to the Non Muslims,

This is the Way of Sunni Islam. If any have any doubts I would advise two excellent websites:

www.sunnipath.com

www.masud.co.uk

Wasalam.

I said to you akhi, If you want to disus about these matters, Please write in the muslim forum.

Why do not the moderators move this issue to the muslim forum?

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Assalamu alaykum,

This is a surprising question considering almost every single scholar of Islam belonged to one of the four madhabs.

Please read the articles on the subject at www.masud.co.uk and www.sunnipath.com

InshaAllah I shall now refrain from posting on these subjects until I get access to the Muslim forum.

Wasalamu alaykum.

[AbuMubarak]

fair enough, we would appreciate seeing your views on islam in the open forum

[GenN]

The way of Sunni Islam is to take the branch of Islam from living jurists who follow one of the four Sunni schools of fiqh: the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali schools;

the branch of Iman from living scholars belonging to one of the two Sunni schools of ‘aqida: the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools;

and the branch of Ihsan from living masters of one of the many Sufi orders that have emerged over the centuries, such as the Qadiri, Naqshbandi, Shadhili, Chishti, and Rifa‘i tariqas.

Allah also says that he will preserve this deen of ours. It has been preserved as stated in the above quote alhamdullillha.

Hadith also says the majority of the ummah will not be lead astray.

Alhamdullillah the vast majority of the ummah has been united upon Ahle sunnah as stated in the above quote. History bears witness to this.

Abu M, whilst it would be detestible to split into sects, the mere fact that people like kwarij, mutazilah etc appeared will automatically group the people on the pathe of the sunnah into a certain group of people i.e the group upon the sunnah, and evey group of people is given a name so that people know whom you are referring to, a anme is nothjing more than a recognising factor, it is the concept behind the name which is important.

These people who followed this path of quran and sunnah as understood and transmitted by the salaf came to be known as ahles sunnah or sunni for short.

A point to add abouty the Ihsan bit, is that it should exclude all reprehensible bidahs and be practiced within the limits of sharia. So to spot a bad sufi froma good sufi you need to know the basics of sharia and see if the sufi is wihthin these limits, and also does his practice of ihsan entail bidah or not, beacsue it should not.

Excellent post Sunni. Jazakallah.

[AbuNajm]

"A point to add abouty the Ihsan bit, is that it should exclude all reprehensible bidahs and be practiced within the limits of sharia. So to spot a bad sufi froma good sufi you need to know the basics of sharia and see if the sufi is wihthin these limits, and also does his practice of ihsan entail bidah or not, beacsue it should not. "

so to spot a good sufi from a bad sufi one needs to kno the basics of shariah- the basics of shariah? a good sufi from a bad sufi? practice of ihsan?

these are just a couple of the many points about defining Islam in such a fashion that renches my gut every time, and the fact that so many people might agree to this is also unnerving...

Wallahu Alim,

[GenN]

these are just a couple of the many points about defining Islam in such a fashion that renches my gut every time, and the fact that so many people might agree to this is also unnerving...

simply a lack of understanding akhi. It will come in time inshallah.

the basics of shariah? a good sufi from a bad sufi? practice of ihsan?


which of the 3 questions do you want explaining?

[Huja Usman]

Originally posted by AbuNajm
[B

these are just a couple of the many points about defining Islam in such a fashion that renches my gut every time, and the fact that so many people might agree to this is also unnerving...

Wallahu Alim, [/B]


Islam the religion of Allah is not a minor "thing" that can be completly explained by in 1 hour. The Scholars of Islam. Imam-I-Azam Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Ahmet bin henbel all of them have explained Islam in sections. From Aqida, To Fiq. From 'ilmul Hadis to Tazkiyat Nefs (Purifcation of the Soul).

[AbuNajm]

"Islam the religion of Allah is not a minor "thing" that can be completly explained by in 1 hour. The Scholars of Islam. Imam-I-Azam Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Ahmet bin henbel all of them have explained Islam in sections. From Aqida, To Fiq. From 'ilmul Hadis to Tazkiyat Nefs (Purifcation of the Soul)."

exactly my point Huja, so why complicate matters by referring to other than them?

GenN, we have been over this many times before, and we are not going to reach an agreement on this board, Wallahu Alim, but i dont appreciate the condescention implied in your words- thats out of line with where we left things off in our latest debates...

the debates section has been called off for Ramadhan, and so that does not mean go ahead with posting debatable issues to test the restraint and resolve of others who respect that move by the moderators- please refrain from that as you know exactly where it leads...

tazkiyah an nafs, shiism, tasawuf, sufiyah, matreediyah, ashariyah, salafiyah etc. have all ignited hot debates on this board, even in the short time that i have been here, and certainly snide comments such as the one you made about me 'understanding in time', GenN- so might i recommend that we just leave alone those topics for the time being, given that its the same old people who are going to end up getting into it, namely, me and you, GenN, and where Shia are mentioned, Hamza is close behind- dont need him getting started either....

agreed? good.....

[GenN]

Sorry Abu Najm, i did mean that in a rude way or intend to hurt your feelings. I'm sure from our latest debates you understand i would not be making any remarks intended in a bad way.

All i meant was basically, that you would inshalla see where i and others are coming from with these issues of eman, islam and ihsan and thats its not as deviant as you think. Thats all.

But yes we have been through this many times, inconclusivly so atleast for now we shall refrain.

Once again i sincerly apologize if my comment sounded rude.

[AbuNajm]

Wallahu Alim, Brother GenN,

Both of us cannot be correct on this issue, but Allah AWJ is the best to settle our affairs, unless either one of us are corrected before our own judgement- the most dangerous position is to assume that the truth resides in any given one of the Muslimeen...

Thats the thing, I dont claim to know for sure, and in time I hope to know with absolute certaintly, before the judgement- but insha Allah, Allah AWJ does not punish us for staying away from things that cause doubt or are not based upon the clear ayat and example of Rasulullah, SAWS!

May your certainty in these matters not be a source of harm or misguidance to you or others, and if you are correct may Allah AWJ guide me towards that which will bring a final reconciliation between us....

[Brother_Daniel]

Originally posted by Sunni
the branch of Iman from living scholars belonging to one of the two Sunni schools of ‘aqida: the Ash‘ari and Maturidi schools;

and the branch of Ihsan from living masters of one of the many Sufi orders that have emerged over the centuries, such as the Qadiri, Naqshbandi, Shadhili, Chishti, and Rifa‘i tariqas.

Are you trying to justifiy groups like the Ash'ari? Estaghfirullah! The Ash'ariyya deny the attributes of Allah! May Allah preserve us from their devience. And Soofies, don't even get me started on those spreaders of bid'ah and shirk.

[GenN]

Abu najm, you may not like what i'm going to say but i will say it anyway. You already know some the different groups/sects i have been with and i will now say that i have complete certainty that what i am now upon is the staright (not all the minor fiqh issues, i'm talking about the aqeedah and fundamentals of deen here). Wallahi bro, the day i read that hadith of jibril alyslaam the confusions i had were all expelled alhamduliilah and the best thing was that i was amongst the same school of thought as the majority of the kahalf, the salaf and ultimatly what was taaught by the prophet Sallhualiwaslaam.

For me the biggest issue was my aqeedah and now alhamdullillha i am now upon certainty in my aqeedah.

Me now, i need to try harder into putting into practice what i have learnt.


Are you trying to justifiy groups like the Ash'ari? Estaghfirullah! The Ash'ariyya deny the attributes of Allah! May Allah preserve us from their devience. And Soofies, don't even get me started on those spreaders of bid'ah and shirk.

Brother daniel, tell me whcih attributes asahris deny, and as for sufi's er hmm, lets see now, to name a few Schoalrs, Imam nawawi, imam suyuti, Asqalani and many more were upon bida'h and shirk? Amongst some generals, muhammed al fatih, uthman dan fodio, imam shamil and many more were upon shirk and bidha?

Akhi you are talking about extreme sufis and extreme asharis. Do not make generalising statements about a group like that. generalisation is an evil in itself.

I honestly do not want to start a debate with you. I have had enough of them already (you can read the deabtes between me and abu njam (theres a good 6 or 7 out there in the last couple of months)if you want to know my position and if you want to understand a bit more about the position of maturid/ashari and sufi (non extreme))

[Brother_Daniel]

Brother daniel, tell me whcih attributes asahris deny, and as for sufi's er hmm, lets see now, to name a few Schoalrs, Imam nawawi, imam suyuti, Asqalani and many more were upon bida'h and shirk? Amongst some generals, muhammed al fatih, uthman dan fodio, imam shamil and many more were upon shirk and bidha?

From what I have read about Ash'ariyya they take an extreme position on the attributes of Allah. They say that when Allah takes about an attribute in the Qur'an (hands, face, etc) that these are metaphorical and stand for something else, i.e. hands = Allah's power. (Also there are the anthoropmorphists who say that when Allah takes about having a hand he means a hand that looks just like a human hand). The correct position on the subject, as I understand it, is admitting the attributes of Allah, but without defining them. An example would be that when Allah talks about his hands, we accept he has hands, but without saying what they are like. But we should not deny them by giving them metaphorical interpretations.
As to the Soofies, perhaps I put what I meant in the wrong wording. But many Soofies these days are involved in such misguided practices as grave worship and the claiming of Divine incarnation. While my statement of generalization was wrong, I still don't trust Soofies. You understand where I am coming from?

[AbuNajm]

Brother GenN,

Your are right, i didnt like your statement- but maybe not for the reasons that you might imagine. I am generally mistrustful of anyone who claims that they are upon the correct path, and then go on to list a string of epithets.

You have never backed up your claims that the majority of Ahlus us Sunnah is united upon the Matreediyah-Ashariyah Sufi sect of Islam- never! YOu quoted two obscure people who stated what you state about the Ashariyah-Matreediyah Sufi, Qalyub and Haddad, who I found to have serious credibility problems and are not major scholars, and wrongly interpreted ahadith.

I have no doubt in my mind that you picked up your new 'faith' in Pakistan or from Pakistani scholars, and that your claims that Imam Nawawi, Imam Suyuti, and Imam ibn Hajar were upon sufiyah is also incorrect, or rather a loaded interpretation of tasawuf- it is the same interpretation that people use to claim that Imam Malik supported sufiyah, when he may or may not have referred to tasawuf, but not in the same manner as referred to now a days by the Matreediyah-Ashariyah Sufi sects, of which you belong to.

Brother Daniel, you are absolutely well-founded in your distrustfulness of ashariyah-matreediyah sufiyah. These people are a group that in general are lacking knowledge and the benefit of action but very slick with their kalam and rhetoric. They do not hesitate to re-interpret ahadith, their scholars have deviated from the classical tafsir of Quran, and they treat everyone like a ghost of the mutazilah or jahmiyah or even khawarij, astaghfirullah. They rely on incredible sources and unclear texts to provide the foundation for much of what they base their aqeedah and ibaadah on, and generally you will only end up discussing things that neither benefit you nor aid you in better understanding more important areas of deen such as salaat, siyam, Jihad Akbar, etc...You are right on with regards to the attributes of Allah AWJ and there is no need nor benefit in going any deeper than that.

I applaud your reaching where you have in regards to your stance to sufiyah and ashariyah-matreediyah, and Insha Allah you didnt have to jump through many of the hoops that i had to in order to get there.

[GenN]

Akhi abu najm, re read what we have been disuccusing. where you got haddad and qalyub as the only ones i mentioned i dont know. (in fact i have my resevrations also with people like haddad due to his being ok with the likes of certain deviants whom i will refrain from mentioning.) I have mentioned many leading scholars who belonged to either maturidi or ashari. One only needs to refer to their books to know this. If you decide to refer to salafi scholars they will say no these great schoalrs of the past were not ashari or maturidi. If you go almost anywhere else in the world wheteer it be egypt, west africa, indian subcontient, sham etc ect they will say yes these great scholars of the past were ashari or maturidi. Who do you trust is telling you the truth? The vast majotiy of these diverse people who don't exactly have links that they should decide to unite upon lies for the sake of asharis and maturidis, or the salafis?

And i most certainly did not pick up my islam in pakistan. In pakistan i really only sat with Ahlul hadith scholars. I think you think i have studied in a deobandi madrassh. i have never studied at a madrassh. If it can be said i have studied with any one in a madrassh it will be the ahul hadith scholars in pakistan.

sorry abu najm that was just a few clarifications about me. I honestly do not want to start another debate in the middles of ramadhan. I apologise if i offend or hurt you in any way please forgive me brother.

And brother daniel, that is only some asharis you are talking about and only they do it when in the arabic language there is the scope for such possibilty for example with yadd, in arabic this has more than one meaning. Not all asharis are like that. Same with maturirids. And i understand your concern about sufi today, i hold thesame view. However this does not mean we criticse all sufis past and present.

As for the attributes of Allah then they are as best befits him. When Allah says for example istiwa we do not interpret this as being above and we actually start imagining above , becasue that would be limiting Allah with attributes of creation i.e direction. We simply say Allah istiwa al arsh, as best befits him, in whatever manner he means, without resembling to creation, without imaging it.

[AbuNajm]

Qalyub and Haddad are mentioned in our debate on the subject, which unfortunately is now hidden- they were quoted in one of your posts as stating that Ahlul us Sunnah is united upon Ashariyah or Matreediyah and anything else is astray or something to that effect- but they are the only ones who are quoted as saying this...I took the liberty of looking into these two figures- Qalybubi has barely any history, and was involved in writing some treatises on medicine, and Haddad was involved with a group that seems to think that some shiekhs form the center of the Islamic universe of something like that- so immediately it made me doubt that the more classical scholars such as Nawawi, Suyuti, Ibn Hajar, et alia, May Allah AWj have Mercy on them, had the same point of view...Unfortunately, the quotes you posted from Haddad and Qalyubi were embedded sneakily into quotes from the former mentioned classical scholars quotes giving the false impression that they felt similarly- I know it wasnt your fault, you had posted that from a website that i also found the same wording myself....

There is nothing wrong with debating, i think that is still going on, and has always gone on in more than just the debates or sects area- its when debating turns to slander, hostility, and foul language or threats that cause people to become upset and perhaps reduce the reward of the readers and writers Ramadhan...

there really is nothing debateable here, the fact is Ashari and Matreedi, the people didnt come until the time of the last Imam of the 4 madhab, Imam Ahmad- and Imam Ahmad rejected Ashari and his perspective- that is historical fact admitted by both Ashariyah and Ahlul us Sunnah...I fail to see the need for us to revisit the acceptability of Ashariyah point of view when we have the historical perspective and opportunity to know the direct fatwa of what the Ummah is undoubtedly united upon- the Imams of the 4 madhab...I have never known the Imams of the 4 madhab to differ with regards to something so serious as what persons or groups were associated with their views in Islam- Hanafi certainly knew who fell within the realm of acceptablility in the sunnah and ilm, same with Malik, Shafi'i, and Ahmad, May Allah AWJ have Mercy on them- and what makes them Ahlul us Sunnah and those who follow them, is that they didnt look at each other with disdain but rather accepted the followers of each one were within the bounds of the sunnah, insha Allah...So when we know for a fact that Ahmad did not accept the philosophy or aqeedah of Ashari, its a no brainer for me- neither should I...

Not that I should know how to delve into refuting Ashari, i dont beleive that Imam Ahmad felt the need to, their are a couple of statements reported from Imam Ahmad, and his students, but no real effort was taken to refute Ashari, just he was rejected by the Ahmad and subsequently the Hanbaliyah...Now we have people, i believe, taking advantage of the fact that Ashari and his incarnation in aqeedah matreedi, were not more specifically condemned by Ahmad, and see it as a tacit approval- or people just respect the two Muslims- but i fail to see how the opinion of Imam Ahmad can be overlooked when as Ahlul us Sunnah we are united upon what Imam Ahmad refined for us in this deen, al Hamdu Lillah, and take from Ashariyah or Matreediyah, make new madhabs without ijtihad or explicit agreement from ijma or even a majority of scholars, or even by pass the aqeedah that was refined for us through the 4 Imams for two latecomers from the Khalaf?

I am quite certain as to what is the more correct view in this situation and not from what someone filled my head with, but rather from looking into it myself and reading the opinions of various scholars, even those who some claim to be ashariyah or matreediyah...I have never limited myself to salafi scholars or shiekhs, and I never will and anyone who thinks that is just blinded by their hate for a group that i dont belong to- LOL...

What i see to be the problem is that where scholars from the khalaf utilized some of the language or terminology of the kalam devoloped by Ashari or Matreedi, others jump to conclusions and claim them to be upon a 'new madhab' of Ashariyah or Matreediyah, and this couldnt be further from the truth....I see that in the khalaf, a lot of brothers became involved in the refutation of deviant groups, and May Allah AWJ reward them for their efforts, but in doing so became caught up in the kind of kalam and discussion of the attributes of Allah AWJ, that the Imams of the 4 madhab withheld from and in fact disapproved of- and today this mistake has now eeked into the discussion of basic aqeedah, where it doesnt belong...

Brother Daniel, I am very glad to see that you are drawn in by the pretty language used to substantiate or qualify the Mutashibaat or unclear ayat of the Quran- but rather it is the practice of Rasulullah, SAWS, the Sahabah, RA, the Tabi'een, RA, the Tabi'Tabi'een, RA, and the 4 Imams, May Allah AWJ have mercy on them, to leave these ayat alone and to accept them as they are without explanation or qualification- that is the aqeedah of the salaf, RA and that is what the Ahlul us Sunnah are united upon without a doubt...Good Work, and May Allah AWJ keep guiding you, insha Allah...

sorry for the lenght of this post, but in order to keep to the limits sometimes words become more roundabout, and insha Allah in stating more I hope i didnt fall into the greater possibility of lying or transgressing....

regards,

abu najm

[AbuNajm]

Might I propose that when we go beyond discussing Rasulullah, SAWS, the Sahabah, RA, the Tabi'een, RA, the Tabi'Tabi'een, RA, or the 4 Imams, Hanafi, Malik, Shafi'i, and Ahmad, May Allah AWJ have mercy on them, that we cease discussing what the Ahlul us Sunnah are united upon...

When we go beyond the above named people, then we get into what the ummah is clearly DIS-united upon for obvious reasons that the subject of beyond these Mu'meen, raises such heated or disjointed discussions among regular Muslims for the mere fact that even our scholars are not united upon anyone other than them....

The logic is there and available for anyone who does not have factional allegiances....

[GenN]

Akhi abu najm, i agree with a lot of what you said. I would just like to point out that i know what you mean about haddad but i only quoted from him becasue i could not find much else on the topic on line. Off line there is a world of info. Besides i quoted from others too like keller, becasue he has some info online too, but a lot more can be found offline by many other people. Don't think that i take haddad as a point of ref, i only did it in a few articles as there appeared to be nothing wrong with them articles and cos i could not find much elses on line.

I know many of the hanbalis have been at the throats of the ashariys for a long time...but only some ashariys. However there is a point that you have overlooked i think.

Amongst the hanbalis there are two groups. Whilst both claim to have the aqeedah of Ahmed bin hanbal only one truly does, the ones that actualy follow ibn hanbal such as ibn Jawzi.

These real followers of the Athari aqeedah and they completley rejected the anthrpomorhisp/literalist hanbalis and did not accept them as they were literalists, although they too calim to upon the aqeedah of ahmed bin hanbal. (i'm sure ive given you the quotes by ibn jawzi witt refernces before)

And it is these literalists that rejected ashariya completly, not the true atahris. The atahris only rejected maybe certain deviant ashariys who would not really even fall under ashariya. Your claim that ahmed bin hanbal rejected ashariya is not a historical fact, it is no doubt something promoted by the literalsit hanbalis, not the real hanbalis. Do not forget it is very easy to mis use quotes and quote out of context, so for people like me and you it really does boil down to trust and i'd rather trust the vast majority of the ummah, who are far apart from each other and have nothing in common with each other for them to be united upon a lie or misunderstanding.

Alas in todays age the true hanbalis have become a minority and with saudi sponsered funding the literalists have got so much of their views into the lime light and with so much funding so much publishing of their books, web sites etc.

but of course you will not accept a lot of this that i have told you akhi and it is pointless debating on line cos i truly will not be able to provide you all the neccassary info and evidences online. I can recommend a schoalr in America, Abdurahman ibn yousuf (i can give you his contact details if you want) i'm sure he can answer many of your queries inshalla and he is no deviant maturidi.

You have read aqeedah at-tahwiyah and you have said there is nothing in it ithat you disagree with. If there is nothing in it that you disagree with then HOW can you critices the ashariya and maturidia as that aqeedah is what the aqeedah of the salaf was, the aqeedah that almost all ashariya and maturidi accept. I agree that we should not discuss anything beyond the salaf and the 4 imams you mentioned as anything not amongst them is not ahles Sunnah. I comletly agree with that as does almost every muslim on earth.

But don't you see that what the salaf taught is what aqeedah tahwiyah states, it is what the ashariya and maturidia state? Ashariya and maturid did not come up with theie own aqeedah out of no where. Rather, at around theri times things were getting down on paper and recorded and all these people did was record what was passed down to them from the salaf. Walahi brother if these things had not been recorded we would have a world of differences today, and we think we have a lot today with everything having been recorded, imagine it had not been recorded. Don't forget ashariy was a student in the chain of Ash shafi, and Maturidi was in the chain of Abu hanifah, and they stuck with the madhabs of there grand teachers not only in fiqh but in aqeedah.

I think it is honestly pointless me and you, abu najm debating, we have already done a lot of it and reached no real conclusion. all i ask you is to speak to Abdurahman ibn yusuf, and the only reason i ask you to speak to him is cos in America he is the best person i can think of. We will not reach a solution here on ummah it seems.

And as for you going to different peopel than that is good. Howerver regfardless of what you calim about not being a salafi, all your beliefs from what i have seen so far are in line with what the salafis promote, so wheteher you want to ascribe yourslef to the salafis or not others will see you as a salafi. remeber the example that was used, if you walk, talk and eat like a duck then your a duck, reagrdless whetehr you call yourself anything else.

forgive me if i have said anything to offend you and May allah forgive me if i have said anything i should not have.

[Brother_Daniel]

GenN, can you give me an example of Ashariyah that don't deny the attributes of Allah?

[GenN]

I don't know if you mean past or present so i'll give both that have not denied attributes of Allah.

Past ashariys, Imam nawawi (you only asked for one example)

Present : as for ashariys I cannot say as i am not really affiliated with ashariys too much however i will provide the maturidi ones if you want and there is not much difference between the 2 maturidi and ashariy it s only in the bracnches of some points their differneces lye. there fundamentals are the same.

Now for present maturidi example where should i even start?

Ok heres a few

Mufti Taqi Usman (one of the leading muftis in pakistan)
Mawlana Masood Azhar (big jihad promoter in kashmir, you probably heard of him anyways)
Mullah Omar (maybe you've heard of him lol)

infact the majority of the jihad against the british in the indian subcontient in the last couple of centuries was by maturidi hanafis, same as the majority of the jihad in the indian sub contient today is by hanafi maturidis, the deobandi variety that is not the brelvi variety. The ottoman empire was maturidi hanafi and muhammed al fatih the liberator of constatinople was maturidi hanafi and we have all heard the hadith that the one that liberates constainople is blessed and his army is blessed. What further proof could there be for maturidi and ashariy?


the only ones that claim that ashariys and maturidis reject attributes of Allah are those who takes Attirbute literally, and becasue ashariya and maturidi do not take them literally, instead do Tafweedh i.e leave them as they are as best befits Allah, without doing ta'weel OR taking them LITERALLY, becasue the sheer nature of taking them literally implies giving them the qualities of creation, or do ta'weel within its limits of the arabic language.
and as for tafweedh i know, anti maturidi and ashairy say, tawfeed in essence not in meaning but if you look carefully at what is being said there is no difference, this was never even known in ealier centuries tafweedh was tafweedh, there is no difference in meaning and essence.

leave it at as we affirm the attributes of Allah as best befits Allah, in the manner intende by Allah, without resemblance to creation, without trying to imagine them and without negation.

And this is what the aqeedah of the salaf was. Not "and we take the meaning literally" as the literalists like to add on at the end.

[AbuNajm]

Jazak Allah Brother GenN for keeping the discussion well within the proper framework and adab so as not to jeopordize its ability to be allowed by the administrators...

if i may respond to your response to my post first:

you seem to me to be teetering on two separate issues, one- that their are two schools of aqeedah that have been approved by ijma, namely ashariyah and matreediyah, and two- that just because some statements of the salaf, RA, coincide with more recent statements, that the two are in agreement in their entirety.

some would classify there as being 3 schools of aqeedah, namely, ashariyah, matreediyah, and athariyah- exactly who among the major scholars of the salaf, RA, and the khalaf support that breakdown, i do not know- perhaps explicit statements from major scholars could shed more light on whether or not their is ijma on the separation of this aqeedah into 3 schools. my own opinion is that the aqeedah in Islam is but one, and any differences in aqeedah are not like differences in fiqh, rather, differences in aqeedah are not allowed and inherently a difference in aqeedah takes one outside the fold of Islam. The aqeedah of Rasulullah, SAWS, the Sahabah, RA, and the next to generation of Tabi'een, RA, and the Salaf, RA, was one aqeedah, not two or three, and the authentic transmissions and summaries of the major scholars of the salaf, RA, are enough for the Muslims as a guide. Where people begin to differ is where ashariyah and matreediyah begin to add or subtract, interpret or fail to interpret, in effect change what we inherited from the Salaf, RA- and this is what i see as unacceptable, regardless if the result is good or bad, clearer or muddier, more concise or more voluminous...and i believe my understanding of this, despite anyones assuming that it is salafi-ish, is what the ahlus us sunnah is united upon, and what the major scholars of the salaf, RA, and the khalaf have ijma about...

again, let me restate, you have asserted something, that is repeated on the internet many times, namely that the ahlul us sunnah is united upon matreediyah and ashariyah as schools of aqeedah, or even madhabs on par with that which was established by the 4 Imams of the Maliki, Hanafi, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools of fiqh- and I have found no statements by the major scholars that this is indeed true, or even that ijma has been reached regarding this issue...rather what i have found is that any scholar that is sharing the same reality as the inhabitants of this earth recognizes that there are people who follow ashari and matreedi, whether or not they are upon the aqeedah of the salaf, RA, has been largely debated, with some saying yes, and some saying they are not- this is far from ijma if even lesser scholars cannot agree about it....

a simple solution would be to bring forth evidence that any major scholar consideres there to be authentic schools of aqeedah- which i think you will suffer in trying to procure since ahlul us sunnah is united upon one authentic aqeedah according to what is needed for consensus...(that is the aqeedah as proposed by the salaf, RA and reported in authentic transmission as summarized by the salaf, RA)

there have been no changes to aqeedah, or circumstances necessitating changes that are what have forced madhabs to be created in fiqh, where new societies, inventions and cultures, necessitated new fatawa, and hence additions to understanding fiqh and the application of shariah- this is not so with aqeedah, the aqeedah does not change with any circumstance, and this is the crux of the ashariyah and matreediyah aqeedahs- they are wrong in their creation alone!

the second problem with your post is that you claim that Imam Nawawi was upon the ashari aqeedah- do you have any statements from himself that state this? i think that is more of what i was expecting- as we could go on making claims like some sufiyah do that even Rasulullah, SAWS, was a sufi-astaghfirullah- and base all our evidence on circumstances and coincidences. which leads to the second problem of your assertions, that just because a statement of aqeedah coincides with the statement of the salaf, RA, does not mean that what might be added or changed also coincides with it, and if someone decides to summarize the statements of the salaf, RA, with regards to aqeedah, this does not in effect, create anything new...so that if indeed what ashariyah and matreediyah have is nothing different from the aqeedah of the salaf, RA, then i am 100% sure that no scholar would have disagreed with it or even begun to call it anything other than the aqeedah of the salaf, RA, or the aqeedah of Ahlul us Sunnah- but rather, somethings were changed or added in the new aqeedah of matreediyah and ashariyah, and this necessitated distinguishing it from the aqeedah of the 4 Imams and the salaf, RA....without going into detail and just using simple logic sheds light on exactly what the controversy is....

and by the way GenN, all of the Asharis or Matreedis that you named are from SouthEast Asia, i wonder is the person you referred me to also from South East Asia? (Abur Rahman Ibn Yusuf) not that it would matter to me either way, as long as he was upon the aqeedah and fiqh of one of the 4 Imams of Ahlul us Sunnah...

brother GenN, i hope you understand, i am not looking to follow anyone, but rather to be guided by Allah AWJ, and to follow Islam...i dont like discussing aqeedah cause it involves belief, and belief does not change with the mind or intellect, but rather is planted by the One in Who's Hands is Our Hearts....

i dont feel the burden is upon me to prove anything as i will only ever rely upon the words of the Salaf, RA and transmitted from Rasulullah, SAWS, in the area of aqeedah, and al Hamdu Lillah, aqeedah is not an area where tafsir, taweel, taqlid, etc. is needed or even allowed when it comes to scholars, rather we are admonished to only take our articles of belief from ahadith and Quran directly- fiqh is a different story...... rather i feel the burden is upon you to provide evidence for your statements that the Ahlul us Sunnah is united upon the Ashariyah or Matreediyah aqeedah- this is something that i am sure some of us are anticipating from you lest you should be spreading something about this deen that is untrue and a source of misguidance...

we have already agreed that what we consider Ahlul us Sunnah in matters of fiqh must be referred back to one of the 4 madhabs founders or students that are universally recognized as students in a line of transmission from the founders, but where we seem to differ is that i believe aqeedah must be taken directly from the Salaf, RA, and that unless someone from the khalaf summarizes exact quotes and statements from the Salaf, RA, ahadith, or Quran, and refers their own aqeedah back to the Salaf, RA, then there statements are not accepted in regards to being on par with the original statements of the Salaf, RA, in fact their statements are rejected for differing from the original aqeedah of Ahlul us Sunnah....

i patiently await your reply to my request for the statements of ijma from major scholars who are among the 4 Madhab, that Matreediyah or Ashariyah are authentic schools of aqeedah that the Ahlul us Sunnah are united upon...if you cant cut and paste from online, then type up statements that you have in books (they shouldnt be any longer then what i just typed so it shouldnt be too much of a burden then)...insha Allah

Wallahu 'Alam

[GenN]

Alhamdullillah Akhi, i agree with a lot of what you said in the last post. I will now try and expalin what i understand from the questions you posed and inshalla we may actually end up agreeing to a certain extent.


some would classify there as being 3 schools of aqeedah, namely, ashariyah, matreediyah, and athariyah

I completly agree there are these 3 schools that are ahle sunnah. The difference between them is simply that of tafweedh and ta'weel on the unclear ayats. You will find that other than this issue there aqeedah is the same as you say, the aqeedah of islam is one.

Whilst ashariys and maturidis mainly do ta'weel on attributes of Allah, the atahris do tafweedh. I personally do tafweedh so it may be said that i am an athari however there are many people that ascribe to matiridi that do tafweedh. I do it so i can simply say my aqeedah is in line with aqeeda at-tahawiyah, which is based more upon tafweedh anyway when you read it. Even imam ashari and maturidi held to tafweedh and only resorted to ta'weel when the deviant sects of the time were giving deviant interpretations of the attributes such as literal ones that comapre to creation and many of the simple minded muslims started following them, and they, ashari and maturidi, simply suggested that this could mean this and this or that.

As for those that complelty reject ta'weel it is simply a matter of lack of research. they say that the salaf did not do taweel so we shouldn't its wrong, bidah, kufr, negation of the attribute etc etc etc.

However both methodologies, ta'weel and tafweedh, are based upon the different sahaba. Some sahaba did do ta'weel, such as ibn Abbas RA. I believe ive given you the quote by imam nawawi (with refs) before where he states that the position of the majority of the salaf and some khalaf is tafweedh and the position of the majority of the khalaf and some salaf is ta'weel on the unclear ayats of th attributes.

perhaps explicit statements from major scholars could shed more light on whether or not their is ijma on the separation of this aqeedah into 3 schools.

So now as the methodology of ta'weel is attributed to imam ashariy (hence those scholars who resort to ta'weel will natuarlly be called ashariys) i will list an explixit statement first of a major scholar and then some more of the major scholars where they resort to ta'weel.


Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami defined the Sunni Muslims as follows in his book Fath al-jawad: "A Mubtadi (innovator) is the person who does not have the faith (Aqeedah) conveyed unanimously by the Ahl as-Sunnah. This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari (d.324/936; Rahimahullah) and Abu Mansur al- Maturidi (d.333/944; Rahimahullah) and the scholars who followed their path." Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami also said in his book al- Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (pg. 205): "'Man of bid'ah' means one whose beliefs are different from the Ahl as-Sunnah faith. The Ahl as- Sunnah faith, is the faith of Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari, Abu Mansur al- Maturidi and those who followed them. One who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid'ah."


now for others that clearly resort to ta'weel

Imam Abu Mansur `Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 429) in Usul al-Din says: "The correct position according to us is the interpretation of the Throne in this verse to mean the sovereignty (al-mulk), as if He meant that the sovereignty has not been established for any but Him. This interpretation is taken from the saying of the Arabs: "So-and-so's Throne has toppled" if he lost his power." He then cites three examples from poetry illustrating this. He says about the characteristics of Ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama`a in his al-Farq bayn al-firaq (The differences between the sects): "Ahl al-Sunna are in consensus (ajma`u) that Allah, the Flawless, the Exalted, is not bounded by location." He then reports the saying of Sayidina `Ali: "Allah created the Throne as an indication of His power, not for taking it as a place for Himself."


Ibn al-Hammam al-Hanafi (d. 681) said in al-Musayara: "It is obligatory to believe that Allah is established on the Throne while negating any likeness to creation. As for saying that His establishment (istiwa') is a conquering (istila'), it is permissible but not obligatory since there is no evidence for it specifically... However, if it is feared that the common people will not understand istiwa' without conceiving of contact and other corporeal characteristics, and if they do not negate the latter, then there is no harm in directing their understanding to istila', as its usage and meaning for istiwa' is established in language from the poet's saying: "Bishr has conquered (istawa `ala) Iraq" and "When we towered above them and conquered them (istawayna `alayhim)..."



Laughter. Of the hadith related in Sahih al-Bukhari from Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said,

"Allah Most High laughs about two men, one of whom kills the other, but both of whom enter paradise: the one fights in the path of Allah and is killed, and afterwards Allah forgives the killer, and then he fights in the path of Allah and is martyred,"
the hadith master (hafiz) Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458/1066) records that [Muhammad ibn Yusuf] al-Farabri (d. 320/932) related from the hadith master Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256/870) that he said, "The meaning of laughter in it is mercy" [emphasis mine] (Bayhaqi, Kitab al-asma’ wa al-sifat [1358/1939. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi, n.d.], 298).

Shin. Of the Qur’anic verse,

"On a day when shin shall be exposed, they shall be ordered to prostrate, but be unable" (Qur’an 68:32),
al-Tabari says, "A number of the exegetes of the Companions (Sahaba) and their students (tabi‘in) held that it [a day when shin shall be exposed] means a dire matter (amr shadid) shall be disclosed [emphasis mine] [n: the shin’s association with direness being that it was customary for Arab warriors fighting in the desert to ready themselves to move fast and hard through the sand in the thick of the fight by lifting the hems of their garments above the shin. This was apparently lost upon later anthropomorphists, who said the verse proved ‘Allah has a shin,’ or, according to others, ‘two shins, since one would be unbecoming’]" (Jami‘ al-bayan, 29.38). Al-Tabari also relates from Muhammad ibn ‘Ubayd al-Muharibi (d. 245/859), who relates from Ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181/797), from Usama ibn Zayd [al-Laythi] (d. 153/770), from ‘Ikrima [ibn ‘Abdullah al-Barbari] (d. 104/723), from Ibn ‘Abbas (d. 68/687) that shin in the above verse means "a day of war and direness (harb wa shidda)" [emphasis mine] (ibid., 29.38). All of these narrators are those of the rigorously authenticated (sahih) collections except Usama ibn Zayd, whose hadiths are well authenticated (hasan).

And akhi there are many more, but that should suffice for now.



Where people begin to differ is where ashariyah and matreediyah begin to add or subtract, interpret or fail to interpret, in effect change what we inherited from the Salaf, RA- and this is what i see as unacceptable, regardless if the result is good or bad, clearer or muddier, more concise or more voluminous.

Now that is where we differ. Ashariy and maturidi have not ad or subtract or change anything. The issue is of ta'weel. Ashariy and maturidi havent come up with their own aqeedah out of no where. There aqeedah is the same as that of the salaf, especailly those salaf that did do ta'weel, thats all thers no difference really other than that of ta'weel and tafweedh. And that is also why you could not find anything to disagree with in aqeedaht at-tahwiyah becasue that was the aqeedah of the salaf. I think that adding and subtracting and differing, interpretin, changing bit is a misunderstanding you have about ashriya and maturidiya. It is only an issue to ta'weel and tafweedh, and even this issue did not exist until the literalists came about and started asying things like that by doing Ta'weel it negates the attribute. that is so absurd, how does it negate when we say that the mening is not the intended literal meaning as the literal meaning is applicable only to creation. everyone was ok with ta'weel and tafweedh as both methodologies were acceptable to sahaba, with tafweedh being the better, but due to circumstances at time of imama ashariy ta'weel becoming inevitable.



but rather, somethings were changed or added in the new aqeedah of matreediyah and ashariyah, and this necessitated distinguishing it from the aqeedah of the 4 Imams and the salaf, RA....without going into detail and just using simple logic sheds light on exactly what the controversy is....


nothing was changed or added, it is only issue of ta'weel and tafwidh, and no body differed it from the qeedah of the salaf except the literalists. The literalists try and give the literalist aqeedah to the salaf when in reality the aqeedah was mainly tafwidh and occasionally ta'weel and that is why the literalists cannot stand ashariy and maturidi and start spreading slanders that their aqeedah is different to the salaf when in relaity it is the same. In fact it is the aqqedah of the literalists that is differnt to the salaf and the worst thing is they ascribe it to Ahmed bin hanbal as folowing his aqeedah. I will pick upon on eexample for now about istiwa and show you that literalism was never allowed in aqeedah of the salaf, it was only tafweedh and ta'weel. First let me show you how easily it is to quote out of context and give the wrong meaning.

MAny of the literalists quote abu hanifah, to prove that allah is in the above direction and say


He said in his al-Fiqh al-akbar: "Allah has no limits, nor any rivals... He who says: 'I do not know if my Lord is in the heavens or on the earth' is a disbeliever, and he who says: 'He is on the Throne, and I do not know whether the Throne is in the heaven or on the earth,' he is also a disbeliever."

Now abu maturidi, who was a disciple in the cahin of abu hanifah and to whom the true positioons of abu hanifah would have reached explained this statement of abu hanifah as ""The reason is that by such words he suggests a place for Allah and this is idolatry."

and this is further backed by abu hanifahs own claim:

Imam Abu Hanifa (d. 150) says in his Wasiyya: "Had He been in a place and needing to sit and rest before creating the Throne, then the question 'Where was Allah?' would have applied to Him, which is impossible... We assert that Allah is established on the throne without His need (haja) nor settlement (istiqrar) upon it, for He it is Who preserves the Throne and other than it without needing any of them."


And as for ascribing to ahmed bin hanbal, the hanbali Ibn jawzi says to the literalist hanbalis

Ibn al-Jawzi said: "Whoever says: He is established on the Throne "in person" (bi dhatihi), has diverted the sense of the verse to that of sensory perception. Such a person must not neglect that the principle is established by the mind, by which we have come to know Allah, and have attributed pre-eternity to Him decisively. If you said: We read the hadiths and keep quiet, no one would criticize you; it is only your taking them in the external sense which is hideous. Therefore do not bring into the school of this pious man of the Salaf -- Imam Ahmad -- what does not belong in it. You have clothed this madhhab with an ugly deed, so that it is no longer said "Hanbali" except in the sense of "anthropomorphist"....


(remember I gave you this quote last time with ref, i cant find the ref right now but i think it may have been in Daf‘ shubah al-tashbih bi akaff al-tanzih by ibn Jawzi) and as you may know "the true architect of the Hanbali madhhab was not actually Imam Ahmad, who did not like to see any of his positions written down, but rather these were conveyed orally by various students at different times, one reason there are often a number of different narratives from him on legal questions. It is probably no exaggeration to say that the real founder of the Hanbali madhhab was the Imam and hadith master (hafiz) ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1201), who recorded all the narratives from Imam Ahmad, distinguished the well-authenticated from the poorly-authenticated, and organized them into a coherent body of fiqh."



Imam Ahmad was asked about the hadiths mentioning "Allah’s descending," "seeing Allah," and "placing His foot on hell"; and the like, and he replied: "We believe in them and consider them true, without ‘how’ and without ‘meaning’ (bi la kayfa wa la ma‘na) [emphasis mine]."

And he said, when they asked him about Allah’s istiwa’ [translated above as established]: "He is ‘established’ upon the Throne (istawa ‘ala al-‘Arsh) how He wills and as He wills, without any limit or any description that be made by any describer (Kawthari, Daf‘ shubah al-tashbih. Cairo n.d. Reprint. Cairo: al-Maktaba al-Tawfiqiyya, 1396/1976, 28).



now this is tafweedh clearly but the literalist not able to accept or cope this start to say things like tafweedh in essence and tafweedh in meaning, but this has never really existed and tafweedh as always been tafweedh. Regarding Imam ahmed statements about "without meaning" i have seen a recent LEADING literalist claim somehting like that ahmed meant without meaning in essence not the literal meaning. So this leading literalist decide to do ta'weel on on Imam ahmed staments becasue he didnt have any other source for claiming that Ahmed did not mean in meaning.

Imam Nawawi (d. 676) said in Sharh al-muhadhdhab: "It is said: We believe that the Merciful is established over the Throne, and we do not know the reality of the meaning of this nor what is meant by it (la na`lamu haqiqata mi`na dhalika wa al-murada bihi), while we do believe that "There is nothing like Him whatsoever" and that He is exalted far above the most elevated of created things. That is the way of the Salaf or at least their vast majority, and it is the safest because one is not required to probe into such matters."



So these literalists can claim to be atahris all they want, in reality there is a big difference between them and the true athris who's aqeedah was not based upon literal meanings but upon tafweedh.

Akhi i have tried my best to answer most of your questions as best as i understand, but i can give you only so much on line. I have given you some food for thought and thats all, you will have to go out yourself and do some more research from a variety of sources. Everyone calims to be folowing the salaf in aqeedah, and this aqeedah has been summed up for us in aqeedah at tahwiyah and the methodologies are are summed up for us in ashariya/mturidia and atahria i.e ta'weel and tafweedh.

My stance is that i do Tafweedh of the attributes like the salaf and the officail stand of most of the hanafi maturidis is that of tafweedh in idian sub contient is also of tafweedh (not sure of the brelvis i'm talking about the deobandi hanafis).

May Allah forgive me if i have said anything wrong.

[AbuNajm]

you still did not establish ijma for the acceptance of the ashari and matreedi schools of aqeedah...

i will wait for that in order to continue any discussion on the issue, since all of your part of the discussion is based on the acceptance of any taweel whatsoever....

you supplied quotes from ibn Hajar, ibn Jawzi, Hanafi, Ahmad, Baghdadi, and some muhaddithun- but only one quote by ibn Hajar says that matreediyah and ashariyah are ahlul us sunnah, and i have seen an interpretation of that quote to mean that they are not muta'zilahs or jahmiyah, but rather there belief is not one of having deviated beyond the pale of Islam- not stating specifically that Ahlul us Sunnah is united upon the aqeedah as they state it- i can show you clearly where major scholars in their time did not accept their views, but that does not establish IJMA...

you did not provide any quotes either that states there are 3 schools of aqeedah, so i am still waiting for that as well....

thats the beauty of Islam, GenN, the real, pure, beautiful Islam- unless something is authentically and undeniably from Rasulullah, SAWS, or the best generations, RA, then it will fall along the way side over time- and believe me, thats why the salafi are perceived with such a fierce opposition- even people who dont accept blindly what others propose as 'Islam' and 'sunnah' are perceived as salafi, just due to their reluctance to accept anything- and this attitude can be seen in Umar, RA, in the Sahabah, RA- where they often times would not like to hear something contrary to what they thought, but would only permit it based on the sincerity of the other Sahabah, RA, or confirmation of the news by another....

but i will have you know that the reason why you will not find abundant amounts of quotes and ahadith from the Sahabah, RA, directly on this subject is......








cause they didnt like to discuss it! and that is why i wish that you would lay off of the kalam and discussing things that only became an issue when deviant sects came along- hey, guess what, they are no longer here, and the kind of kalam and taweel that only SOME scholars thought was necessary, is no longer needed, and hence should not be used or promoted as fundamental aqeedah-

Do you understand that GenN? you are doing a disservice to this deen, and discussing things without knowledge, i mean really without knowledge- Allah AWJ is established upon the throne, Allah AWJ has my Heart and your Heart in Allah's Hand, and we shall see Allah AWJ as clear as we see the moon on a cloudless night in the next life....thats good enough for me and everyone else except those who have earned the anger of Allah AWJ....

[peacedove]

assalam-o-alaykum

may i add that the gaer-muqallid, or ahl-e-Hadith, or salafi are also ahl-e-sunnah wa al-jama'ah, even more so, because the Comapanions & tabi`een did not belong to any particular madhab.

This is not to start any fighting. muslims should not fight with each other.

[GenN]

Assalamalikum

Erm Abu najm did you read what i was saying? Are you serious you cannot see the consensus? As i said The main distinguinshing feature between the asharis/maturidis and salafis is the issue of ta'weel as i said (there were other issues with earlier sects like quran created but not anymore with salafis so we will stick to ta'weel for now). Well didn't i give you a few quotes about the acceptance of ta'weel from the major scholars after haytamis quote? So they all aceepted al asharis methodology of ta'weel, so what else are you looking for specific quotes that "i was ashari". well whats the point, since you will say as about the quotes i give you, like you did with the one by haytami that i have seen it interpreted in a different way. So if you decide to trust the interpretations of those related to the salafis over all other scholas from the east to the west of the muslims then thats your loss. Scholars that have nothing in common for them to be united upon a lye.

So the conseus of asahris methodology is well established alhamdullillah, and all those agreeing to a certain methodology are usually referred to as a follower of the founder.

The way you are arugin with me now is ridiculous. As an anolgy this is how you are aruing with me. I have just proven to you that all other colours can be made out of the 3 primary colours but you want me to prove to you that all colours can be made out of red, blue and green.


discussing things that only became an issue when deviant sects came along- hey, guess what, they are no longer here, and the kind of kalam and taweel that only SOME scholars thought was necessary, is no longer needed, and hence should not be used or promoted as fundamental aqeedah-


Unfortunatly there are deviant sects still around, a strong deviant today are the salafis and their LITERAL interpretaion of the attributes of Allah, just like the mujassima before them. hence it is very importatn that the ahle sunnah shows the deviance of this literlism with the attributes just like imama al ashari and maturidi did in thier times. Just read books by one of the leading salafis ibn uthamieen, how many times will you see the word literal in it? Have you lost count yet?

o and change that SOME in your statement to MOST.

Allah AWJ is established upon the throne

yeah i know, but not in the literal sense, he is established as best befits him. And unfoirtunatly read the books of the scholars whom you refer to and see what they have to say about his establishment.

Its true i do not have much knowledge, but the knowledge that i do have is the truth, where as yours is mixed with deviant views of literalism do to your blind following of the salafis. Rember you said to me you dont trust someone that claims to have the truth, welll i'll say it again, i am upon the truth. You know why, becasue there can be no DOUBT in aqeedah and By Allah i know that i am upon the truth in my aqeedah which is devoid of the salafis literalism regarding the attributes of Allah alhamdulillah.

By allah abu najm i wish you would stop BLINDLY following the salafis. Claim what you like about not following them. You thoughts speak for themselves. Unfortunatly it is common amongst the salafis (except some that i have come across that study in madinah university for a few years who reject salafism) that they are the biggest muqallids of today. Muqallids of Bin baz and ibn Utayhmeen (may allah have mercy upon them both)

And peacedove why do these people then belong to the gair muqallid, ahle hadith, salfis groups/sects/madhabs.

As for claiming that the sahab do not belong to madhabs and therfore implying there should not be madhabs today that alone speaks vloumes of the ignorance of the understanding of the madhab issue.

[peacedove]

Originally posted by GenN
........ he is established as best befits him.
i agree

Originally posted by GenN
And peacedove why do these people then belong to the gair muqallid, ahle hadith, salfis groups/sects/madhabs.
brother, i do not understand what you want to say.

Originally posted by GenN
As for claiming that the sahab do not belong to madhabs and therfore implying there should not be madhabs today that alone speaks vloumes of the ignorance of the understanding of the madhab issue.
yes brother i am ignorant of what you are saying. my understanding is that the sahaba did not belong to the madhab of any of the four imams, or other madhabs that have died out. When they heard a Hadith, they acted on it. Later when manufactured Hadith came into being, a method was evolved by th Muhadditheen to sort out the real from the chaff.

[AbuNajm]

Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami defined the Sunni Muslims as follows in his book Fath al-jawad: "c. This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari (d.324/936; Rahimahullah) and Abu Mansur al- Maturidi (d.333/944; Rahimahullah) and the scholars who followed their path." Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami also said in his book al- Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (pg. 205): "'Man of bid'ah' means one whose beliefs are different from the Ahl as-Sunnah faith. The Ahl as- Sunnah faith, is the faith of Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari, Abu Mansur al- Maturidi and those who followed them. One who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid'ah."

i would like to have the arabic reference for this statement, so that i can read it myself- because it contradicts itself and this seems very much unlike a great scholars statement- for example:

"A Mubtadi (innovator) is the person who does not have the faith (Aqeedah) conveyed unanimously by the Ahl as-Sunnah"

what is the Arabic wording of 'conveyed unanimously'- since this undoubtedly means that which was communicated over the course of the history of Islam, by all scholars recognized as among Ahlul us Sunnah...rather the next statement goes on to contradict it:

"This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari and Abu Mansur al- Maturidi and the scholars who followed their path."

how can unanimity be transmitted or bottlenecked by two people? it doesnt make sense to me, maybe you can explain it...

if something is unanimous, it is never then only capable of being transmitted by two people, or a finite number of people- it would be transmitted by anyone included within the group...

so i reject that statement until i can read the original wording, and make sure that there is no problems with attributing that statement directly to the Ibn Hajar...

aside from that quote you have nothing, but rather one scholar, whom i respect, stating such- if it was based on ijma, which is not what ibn Hajar is stating, but if it was, it would be confirmable, and the opinion of all scholars at the time and now- the fact is, that it isnt, and you have provided only one questionable quote on the issue, before and now...

ibn Hajar does not state that his opinion is the ijma about the ashariyah and matreediyah, rather that is what some attribute to his statement- but no where does he mention ijma, or what other scholars state on the issue- which if you studied at medina university for usul, ahadith, hudud, shariah, or anything of depth, you would know that this is not sufficient to establish ijma...

try again, GenN...

again, no lengthy posts, your methods and ways of discussing are in serious doubt- just give me the statement of ijma regarding the acceptablility of ashariyah and matreediyah as two schools of aqeedah within Ahlul us Sunnah, or even, as you state, the only recognized schools of aqeedah that unanimously are Ahlul us Sunnah.....

until you do this, nothing you say can be taken seriously- this is a statement you made even before this discussion, and i challenged it, and you never offered your proofs, i suspect you will just hide away your lack of evidence once again with cut and pastes, or dodgy analogies....i have hope however, and i really would like to settle this issue in my own mind....

[GenN]

Ok abu njam, i will see if i can inshall find the original arabic. As for the uanimtiy, again you have failed to realise what i'm saying. bro do you actually read what i write? I am not going to repeat myself as iv'e already stated it twice in this thread alone. Re-read what i have written about the methodology of ta'weel, the distinguishing features of the ashaiyah, and the acceptance of the methodology by the great classical scholars for which i have given quite a few quotes..

As for the statment there is no contradciciton, i think you are misunderstanding it . It means that when Abul hasna ashariy and maturidi scholars came about then evryone accepted them and with all other deviants sects at the time these two scholars were great scholars of ahle sunnah and everyone basically agreed with what they transmitted from the salf - i-salhieen. Of course they were not the only two but them two gained prominence, two that were well accepted, thats all that it means.

[AbuNajm]

show me this great acceptance??!!!

Imam Ahmad turned Ashariyah away! until Ashari became a disciple of one of the students of Imam Ahmad- LOL! and then Ashari took the aqeedah of Imam Ahmad- but knuckleheads still kept following early works of Ashari where clearly he is among the Mutazilah....

what about this dont you understand? Asharis early works, in fact most of them are from the mutazilah perspective, and those who claim to follow Ashari today, including the Shia ashariyah, are in complete utter denial of the attributes, they accept the statements in the Quran, but negate the meaning....

again, you have NEVER established ijma on the acceptance of ashariyah, and you lie when you say you did- YOu are a LIAR when you say that you posted the evidence and the quotes from scholars stating this....

shame on you GEnN-i have lost a lot of respect for your initial apparent search for the truth- i see now that you are blinded by Allah AWJ and that you adhere to those things that have caused many to deviate and to fall into a sect and away from the path of the Qura'an and its' Hikmah....

you are so lost GenN- still waiting for my quotes if you can be bothered to prove what you say....

[AbuNajm]

QUOTES- show me the IJMA GenN, until then you have lied (.) - period...

[GenN]

you need to do more research on the Ibana before you start claiming things you have no knowldeg of.

i will saty one last time, re-read what i gave on ta'weel, the distinguishing featuers of ashariya and the scholars acceptance of the ashaiya methodology of ta'weel. Besides whats the point of giving you the quotes you ask for i give you one by haytami you say you want it in arabic. Do you do that to every quote everyone gives you or did you just decide to be biased to this one by haytami becasue it proves what you were afraid of?

You yourself have stated you only scan my posts, as is suspected you do not read what i write, it is no wonder you miss all the evidences. Pointless discussing with you brother. Wa salaam.

Wa salaam.

[AbuNajm]

just give me the statements from the major scholars from all 4 madhab that state what you have claimed,.....

your qualities as a deviant ashari, and a liar are coming out....

[AbuMubarak]

this stuff gives me such a headache

muslims make this deen so difficult

[GenN]

May Allah guide us all and make us of those whom he has favoured.

[AbuNajm]

ameen to your du'a GenN, but your still on the hook for giving me the statements of ijma....

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

The Ash'ari School



The following is a defence of the Ash'ari school by one of the foremost scholars of Hadith and Fiqh in Makkah at the moment - Shaikh Sayyid Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki al-Makki.




Shaykh Muhammad 'Alawi Maliki: "Many sons/daughters of Muslims are ignorant of the Ash'ari School, whom it represents, and its positions on the tenets of the Islamic faith (aqidah), and yet some of them are not God-fearing enough to refrain from accusing it of deviance, departure from the religion of Islam, and heresy about the attributes of Allah. The ignorance of the Ash'ari school is a cause of rendering the unity of the Ahl al-Sunnah dispersing its ranks. Some have gone as far as to consider the Ash'aris among the categories of heretical sects, though it is beyond me how believers can be linked with misbelievers, or how Sunni Muslims can be considered equal with the most extreme faction of the Mu'tazilites, the Jahmites.

"Shall We deal with Muslims as We do criminals? How is it that you judge?" [Qur'an 68:35-36]

The Ash'aris are the Imams of the distinguished figures of guidance among the scholars of the Muslims, whose knowledge has filled the world from east to west, and whom people have unanimously concurred upon their excellence, scholarship, and religiousness. They include the first rank of Sunni scholars and the most brilliant of their luminaries, who stood in the face of the excesses commited by the Mu'tazilites, and who constitute whole sections of the foremost Imams of Hadith, Sacred Law, Quranic exegesis. Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar 'Asqalani (d. 852/1449; Rahimullah), the mentor of Hadith scholars and author of the book "Fath al-Bari bi sharh Sahih al-Bukhari", which not a single Islamic scholar can dispense with, was Ash'ari. The shaykh of the scholars of Sunni Islam, Imam Nawawi (d. 676/1277; Rahimullah), author of "Sharh Sahih Muslim" and many other famous works, was Ash'ari. The master of Qur'anic exegetes, Imam Qurtubi (d. 671/1273; Rahimullah), author of "al-Jami' li ahkan al-Qur'an", was Ash'ari. Shaykh al-Islam ibn Hajar Haytami (d. 974/1567; Rahimullah), who wrote "al-Zawajir 'an iqtiraf al-kaba'ir", was Ash'ari. The Shaykh of Sacred Law and Hadith, the conclusive definitive Zakariyya Ansari (d. 926/1520; Rahimullah), was Ash'ari. Imam Abu Bakr Baqillani (d. 403/1013; Rahimullah), Imam 'Asqalani; Imam Nasafi (d. 710/1310; Rahimullah); Imam Shirbini (d. 977/1570; Rahimullah); Abu Hayyan Tawhidi, author of the Qur'anic commentary "al-Bahr al-muhit"; Imam ibn Juzayy (d. 741/1340; Rahimullah); author of "al-Tashil fi 'ulum al-Tanzil"; and others - all of these were Imams of the Ash'aris. If we wanted to name all of the top scholars of Hadith, Qur'anic exegesis, and Sacred Law who were Imams of the Ash'aris, we would be hard put to do so and would require volumes merely to list these illustrious figures whose wisdom has filled the earth from east to west. And it is incumbent upon us to give credit where credit is due, recognising the merit of those of knowledge and virtue who have served the Sacred Law of the Greatest Messengers (Allah bless him and grant him peace). What good is to be hoped for us if we impugn our foremost scholars and righteous forbearers with charges of aberrancy and misguidance? Or how should Allah give us the benefit of their scholarship if we believe it is deviance and departure from the way of Islam? I ask you, is there a single Islamic scholar of the present day, among all the PhD.'s and geniuses, who has done what Ibn Hajar 'Asqalani or Imam Nawawi have, of the service rendered by these two noble Imams (May Allah enfold them in His mercy and bliss) to the pure Prophetic Sunnah? How should we charge them and all Ash'aris with abberancy when it is we who are in need of their scholarship? Or how can we take knowledge from them if they were in error? For as Imam Zuhri (d. 124/742; rahimullah) says, "This knowledge is religion, so look well to whom you are taking your religion from."

Is it not sufficient for someone opposed to the Ash'aris to say, "Allah have mercy on them, they used reasoning (ijtihad) in figuratively interpreting the divine attributes, which it would have been fitter for them not to do"; instead of accusing them of deviance and misguidance, or displaying anger towards whoever considers them to be of the Sunni Community? If Imams Nawawi, 'Asqalani, Qurtubi, Baqillani, al-Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Haytami, Zakariyyah Ansari, and many others were not among the most brilliant scholars and illustrious geniuses, or of the Sunni Community, then who are the Sunnis?

I sincerely entreat all who call others to this religion or who work in the field of propagating Islam to fear Allah respecting the honour of the Community of Muhammad (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is possessed of goodness until the Final Hour, we are bereft of any if we fail to acknowledge the worth and excellence of our learned."

In conclusion, the Ahl al-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah are the true followers of the Prophet (Peace be upon him) and his Companions (Allah be pleased with them all), followed by by those who trod their path for the last 1400 years. It is in summary the followers of Imam Abu'l Hasan al-Ash'ari (Rahimullah) and Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (Rahimullah) in Aqeedah, and this saved sect is represented by the adherents of one of the four schools - Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i and Hanbali today. This is the sect which has had the largest following throughout Islamic history as-Sawad al-Az'am) as confirmed by the Qur'anic and Ahadith based evidence and it will remain dominant until the Hour is established, inshaAllah.

[AbuZayd Al-Britaani]

Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami defined the Sunni Muslims as follows in his book Fath al-jawad:

"A mubtadi (innovator) is the person who does not have the faith (aqid'ah) conveyed unanimously by the Ahl as-Sunnah. This unanimity was transmitted by the two great Imam's Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari (d.324/936; Rahimahullah) and Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d.333/944; Rahimahullah) and the scholars who followed their path." Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Haytami also said in his book al-Fatawa al-Hadithiyya (pg. 205): "Man of bid'ah means one whose beliefs are different from the Ahl as-Sunnah faith. The Ahl as-Sunnah faith, is the faith of Abu'l Hasan al-Ashari, Abu Mansur al-Maturidi and those who followed them. One who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid'ah."

[AbuNajm]

the ashariyah and matreediyah are without a doubt the most corrupt of Muslims today, they are the Jahmiyah and Mu'tazilah of today- beware of there rhetoric and discussing that which has no place in any explanation of this deen or aqeedah, and stating that which has no precedence from among the Sahabah, RA, and Rasulullah, SAWS, or the righteous Salaf, RA....

Take what Rasulullah, SAWS, has left behind for us in actions and explanation, what the Sahabah, RA, bequeathed to us, and what the Salaf, RA, have explained about all of this, and leave the rest, insha' Allaah....

will a moderator now please close this thread...

[AbuMubarak]

Bismillaahir Rahmaanir Raheem
___________________

Alhamdu'lillaahi Rabbil'aalameen, wassalaatu wassalaamu 'alaa sayyidil mursaleen

Assalaamu `Alaykum wa Rahmatullaahi wa Barakaatuhu

Which one is the Straight Path?
A forum member recently wrote this note:
Question
Asalaam'Alaikum wa rumatullah wa barakatu,
I am a Muslim convert for 3 years now and I have a question. Now, I am not one who follows religion blindly. I was raised a Baptist Christian and had many questions that went unanswered. After five years of studying almost every different religion imaginable, Islam is the one that made the most sense, answered the questions that puzzled me before, and just made me feel at peace with myself. I truly believe it is God's complete religion.What I am having a problem with is this. I have read many Islamic books, articles, magazines and web pages. Most of them have different ideas as to what the "straight path" is. I have visited different Masjids and different Imams give different answers as well. I know that people from different regions have different customs that have been incorporated into the religion, but that is not what I want. I want to practice the religion exactly as the Prophet (SAW) handed it down. Pure Islam is what I seek. My intention is not to offend, but I feel that because the religion is divided into so many different sects, each sect has altered it in some way. Which path am I to follow? Sunni? Shia? Sufi?...? What about the different sects inside these sects? With the divisions, different things have been incorporated to justify the different branches and ideas. Sometimes I feel lost because I don't know which way to go. Which road is the "straight path"? Please don't say that I have to find this "path" on my own. I have prayed about it so much. I get answers like "all roads lead to the same destination" but that can't be it either because if it were true, then ANY religion that believes in God will make it to paradise, so why associate yourself with any one religion? Just believe and that should be enough; no prayers necessary, good deeds, or anything; just faith alone. I just want to make sure that I learn and teach my son what is correct and what is not.


Answer



We are told that Islam is the Deen of Allaah. It is the straight path that leads to Allaah’s pleasure, success in the Hereafter and admission into the Paradise. However, when new Muslims or young Muslims want to practice Islam and follow the straight path, they encounter such a variety of opinion, practices, approaches, differences of opinions, sectarianism, that they become bewildered, lost and confused as to which way to go, which opinion to follow and which is the ‘straight path’.



In an effort to get out of this quandary, some people take extremist approaches. One extremist approach is to accept all traditions, customs and rites practiced by any people claiming to be Muslims, without challenging even unacceptable practices. Their motto is “all roads lead to the same destination”. The other side excludes from their Islam everything “old” including the traditions of the Prophet Sall-Allaahu 'Alayhi Wa Sallam. The result of both approaches is extremely dangerous. Both end up regarding anything a Muslims says or does as “Islamic”. Both approaches are extremely dangerous because both defeat the essence and purpose for which Islam was prescribed and which make Islam the ‘straight path’.



As well, even many of those who are in the middle and understand that we must practice only the pure Islam as revealed by Allaah and practiced by His messenger, are confused by Salafi’s, Sufi’s and Shia’s claims, not being able to discern as to whose path is ‘straight.’



This article describes what is Islam’s straight path, how the differences of opinion arise and how I personally sort out this confusion created by sectarianism.


The Destination


As a general rule, before we can identify a straight path, we need to know the starting point and the destination. Once we have a clear concept of where we are and where we need to go, a straight path to that destination becomes easier to determine.



In our case, our starting point is our life on this earth. When we reflect on the reality of the creation and operation of the universe around us, our own life and the systems that sustain our life, we are overwhelmed by the power, the authority, the grace and the mercy of our Lord who is sustaining all the systems on which our life depends. We also realize that He must have created us and the universe for a purpose and that He must hold us accountable if we fulfill that purpose or not. Appreciating the kindness of our Lord, we praise Him and want to fulfill the goals for which He has given us life on this earth. Realizing that we have been created to serve Him like slaves, we commit to be such slaves and seek His help in fulfilling that goal. We submit to Him so that we succeed in pleasing Him with our servitude and consequently being admitted into Paradise. For this purpose, we want to spend our time in the activities He approves, to acquire the qualities He likes and to establish the kind of society He wants.



As this is not an easy task, we realize that we need all the help we can get from our Lord not only in identifying the best way to reach tha goal - “the straight path” -- but also in continuously staying on course, in protecting us from the fatigue and disillusionment and in saving us from getting off course.



These are the sentiments that are expressed in Soorah Fatihah that we recite and reflect upon many times a day. It reminds us in a very concise manner our destination, the path and the dangers in our way.



In return, to help us reach our desired destination, Allaah being so kind and merciful clearly identifies the straight path in the Qur-aan as well as gives us vivid descriptions of that destination. He also sent His messenger to teach us the Qur-aan and to serve as the model of living by it.



Accordingly, the ultimate destination we want to reach is that we depart from this world such that Allaah is pleased with us and He redeems us from punishment and admits us into the eternal bliss of Paradise.


The Straight Path


The straight path, also the only way, to that destination is to live by the Deen of Islam -- the Islamic way of life.



Islam is the Deen of every creation of Allaah subhaanahu wa ta`aalaa (SWT). Being from the Creator Himself, it ensures the best operation, optimal results, balance and sustainability. Other creations are pre-programmed in Islam (people call them laws of nature), but human beings have been given freedom in their social life to choose if they want to live by Islam ordained by the Creator or to live by other rules.



Consistent with all laws of Allaah for other creations, Islam for human beings is also designed to bring out the best of humanity, if followed purely and properly. It is designed to make an individual the best a human being can be, and a society the best a human society can be. Hence, Islam’s goal for individuals is that they should excel in their morals, ethics, conduct, behaviour and dealings. This is called purity of self (Tazkiyah).



Islam’s goal for the Muslim community is to establish a well-organized, disciplined, structured and cohesive society that establishes justice, fairness, equity, peace and security for all; ensures human dignity, equality and respect for everyone; and, is characterized by a loving, caring, sharing, gracious and kind environment. This is called establishment of Deen.



These are the two rails of the straight path that must be treaded simultaneously to remain on course.



The four wheels that take us on the journey are given in the Soorah Al-‘Asr: Eemaan, Good Deeds, promoting Haqq and promoting Sabr.



1. Eemaan is the foundation on which the edifice of Islam is built. A person has Eemaan if his or her heart and mind both

sincerely believe in:



Allaah as the only Lord and that He is One, Unique and Infinite in all His Attributes as well as shape, form and image.
Muhammad as the final prophet and final messenger of Allaah on whom ended a long series of righteous prophets and messengers from Allaah. Implications of this belief include that he must be obeyed as the messenger of Allaah unconditionally, and that his Sunnah and his model of practicing Islam must be regarded the only true model of Islam until the Day of Judgment.
The accountability of everyone to Allaah SWT individually without any help being available from anyone else in this regard. Unquestioned obedience to any leader, scholar, sheikh or ‘aarif will not be a valid excuse for any un-Islamic actions.
The Holy Qur-aan as the last, complete and all-inclusive guidance from Allaah that also contains and preserves whatever was truly revealed by Allaah as Deen of Islam to the previous prophets and messengers.
The Angels as functionaries who do exactly what Allaah commands them.


When this faith takes solid footings in the heart, mind and soul of a person, it shows in a believer’s attitude in the following manner:



The person becomes Allaah-centred, thinking about Him throughout the day (Dzikr) and striving to do the things that

will please Him and avoiding everything that will be disliked by Him (Taqwa). His intentions for all of his actions

become purely for Allaah and he becomes sincere in his dealings and behaviour (Ihklaas and Naseehah). He is

liberated from all other worries and fears and becomes fully reliant on Allaah in terms of doing his best and leaving the

results to Allaah (Tawakkul). He also formally joins the community of believers in a structured and organized manner

(Jamaa’ah).



This showing of faith in attitude and behaviour is called “Shahaadah” – the witness of faith and first pillar of Islam. This is the foundation for the development of Islamic personality and good behaviour.



2. While the Shahaadah of faith becomes the foundation for good behaviour, the other four pillars of Islam (Salaah,

Zakaah, Sowm and Hajj) provide the structure around which the Islamic personality is built and the pleasure of

Allaah is attained. They also act as the practical and active forms of Dzikr (rememberance) of Allaah through which

Taqwa and Eemaan are further nourished, strengthened and reinforced respectively. But most importantly, they (the

pillars) also provide the structure for the establishment of political, social and economic system of Islam for the

community of the Believers (Jamaa’ah). The pillars of Islam are not mere rituals like the rites of other religions but are

tools for personal Tazkiyah and provide the framework for the development of the community (Jamaa’ah). The pillars

cannot be called “established” or “practised” unless their collective role for the political and financial system is also

fully implemented in the form of an Islamic society based on Salaah and Zakaah.



Within the structure provided by the pillars, attainment of excellence is aided by six values that govern Islamic behaviour: practice of justice, grace, charity, and avoidance of indecent, bad and transgressive behaviour, as the Holy Qur-aan declares:




Verily, Allaah commands ‘Adl (fairness, equity, justice) Ihsaan (excellence in servitude to Allaah, benevolence towards people, graciousness in dealings) and giving to those close to you, while He forbids Fahshaa (lewdness, indecency, licentiousness, immorality), Munkar (bad actions, undesirable activities, generally unaccepted behaviour, not fulfilling one’s obligations), and Baghy (rebellion, transgressing limits, exploiting or violating others’ rights, Abuse of authority or freedom). He admonishes you so that you heed the advice. An-Nahl 16:90



These values (further explained and detailed in Banee Israaeel 17:22-39) are the determinants of all Islamic injunctions and teachings and must govern the individual and collective (community) behaviour. Practised faithfully they lead to personal and government excellence.



Hence, the good deeds are all those actions that are conducted in accordance with the teachings of the Qur-aan and Sunnah within the framework provided by the pillars of Islam and values dictated by An-Nahl 16:90.



3. Promoting Haqq – working to develop an environment where Haqq is cherished. The love for the faith and good

actions makes the person promote them in the society to see them appreciated, practised and respected everywhere.



Promoting Sabr – promoting, encouraging and nourishing steadfastness, constancy, consistency and perseverance in living by faith, practising good deeds and promoting the right behaviour. Staying constantly and consistently on the abovementioned path is not easy without Sabr and an environment that promotes Sabr.



Promoting Haqq and Sabr are also called Jihaad which represents continuous efforts and hard work undertaken to stay on course on the straight path of Islam -- striving to attain, establish and maintain personal excellence and an ideal Islamic society.



This is the Deen of Islam – the straight path in brief.



The Prophet Sall-Allaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam was asked to invite people of the Book towards this common Deen in the following words:



Say, “Come, I will recite to you what your Lord has forbidden to you: That you do not ascribe anything as a partner with Him; be extremely nice to parents; do not kill your children because of poverty, we provide sustenance for you and for them; do not go near immoralities, whether open or hidden; and do not take a life that Allaah has sanctified except under a legal right; This Allaah commands you so that you attain wisdom. Also, do not approach an orphan’s assets except in the best manner, until he fully matures; measure and weigh accurately and fairly, We do not trouble anyone beyond his capacity; Be just when you say something, even if it concerns people close to you; and fulfil Allaah’s covenant; This He enjoins you so that you are mindful. And verily this is my straight path, so follow it. Do not follow variant paths lest you are separated from His way. This He ordains for you so that you can be righteous.” Al-An’aam 6:151-153



To practise this Deen, many detailed teachings, rules and regulations are needed. Those rules and regulation are called Sharee’ah.


Deen and Sharee'ah


Deen is the paradigm, the principle, the outlook and the approach that sets the attitude, the goals, the direction and destination. The Deen of Islam is what we have introduced so far. It is like a constitution. This has been Deen of Allaah since Adam and it has been consistently the Deen of Islam throughout human society. This is the message conveyed in the following verses:



“Certainly, the only Deen acceptable to Allaah is Islam.” Aali-‘Imraan 3:19



“He has ordained the same Deen for you (O Muslims) as that was enjoined on Nooh, and that has been revealed to you (O Muhammad) and that was enjoined on Ibraaheem, Moosa and Eesa: Namely implement (establish and maintain) the Deen and do not be divided therein." Shoora 42:13



Accordingly, no variation in this Deen is allowed. Any deviation or variation from this Deen is apostasy.



“Whoever seeks a Deen other than Islam, it will never be accepted from him and he will be a loser in the Hereafter.” Aali-‘Imraan 3:85



A Muslim is only the one who believes in this Deen purely and strictly. Any disagreement or deviation from Deen is unacceptable to Allaah SWT, angers Him and will invite His punishment.



The examples of those who disbelief in the essence of Deen, hence divide themselves away from Islam, are the people who:



Do not accept, as a matter of principle, the rule of Allaah on every aspect of their life;
Do not witness the truth of the faith as prescribed by the Qur-aan; for example: Practise Shirk; regards Qur-aanic injunction as outdated or inappropriate for our time; do not accept Muhammad as the last prophet; deny the Sunnah as a s source of Islamic law; or doubt the existence of Hell and Jannah. These are examples of the violation of the first pillar of Islam - Shahaadah;
Deny any of the pillars of Islam or Jihaad as an obligation;
Propagate an opinion or theory that is clearly in contrast with the fundamentals of Deen.

These types of disbeliefs, if left unchecked, destroy the very fibre that knits our Islamic society together. Cooperating with the bearer of these ideas or tolerating them is like demolising our own foundations.

Sharee’ah is the body of the rules and regulations that a believer in the Deen of Islam has to follow. It is like the statutes and the regulations stipulated by a political entity. There has been an evolution in the Sharee’ah of various prophets in keeping with the evolution of human society.

"For each of you (messengers), we have prescribed a law (Sharee'ah) and a clear path" Al-Maaidah 5:48

For example, at the time of Adam, there was a need to allow marrying brothers and sisters. When the human society was grown big enough and the exceptional need was not there, Allaah SWT disallowed it through subsequent prophets. This process of changing the rules of Sharee’ah according to the needs of the society continued until the human society was mature enough that a final edition of Sharee’ah could be given through Muhammad Sall-Allaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam – the last prophet.

Similarly, some strict rules were imposed on Banee Israaeel to punish for their intransigence and to check their ongoing transgression. Those burdens were removed through ‘Eesa ‘alayhissalaam and Muhammad Sall-Allaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam. The Sharee’ah given to the Prophet Muhammad is the final and most complete Sharee’ah that represents the perfect model for humanity until the end of the world.



Even within our Ummah, while there can be no difference in opinion in the principles of Deen, different people may have honest, genuine difference of opinion in the matters of Sharee'ah.


Dealing with Differences in Religious Matters
Difference of opinions is a natural phenomenon among intelligent, thinking people. It is the handling of differences of opinions that makes or breaks a community. In Islamic practices, valid differences may happen in the following two situations:


In matters of details of Islamic practices, the Prophet Sall-Allaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam may have demonstrated flexibility and variety of valid options by doing some things differently at different times.

The differences may also arise in extrapolating rules from a certain set of verses of the Qur-aan and/or Sunnah of the Prophet in applying those to new circumstances that may be encountered.

These are the differences that we find among various schools of Fiqh or among Fiqh schools and Salafis/Ahlul-Hadeeth.



For differences of opinion in these matters of Sharee’ah, as long as each person is earnestly trying to implement the intent of the Qur-aan and Sunnah and has valid pertinent evidence to form the opinion, difference of opinions is not only acceptable but also desirable. This kind of difference of opinion indicates independent thinking among Muslims, encourages reflection instead of blind following and self-corrects the wrong ideas that may have crept into the practices of the Islamic community over time. It takes Islamic teachings dynamic, and keeps them pure and relevant to the believer's life. That is why the Prophet called such differences as Rahmah (mercy). This kind of difference of opinion or practices must be respected and celebrated.


For the first kind of differences, we should show the same flexibility and adopt the variety of practices as adopted by the Prophet. For the second kind of differences, we should weigh the arguments of the different opinions and practise what seems to be closer to the essence of the Deen. It is a great mercy of Allaah, that He will reward everyone for their efforts to fulfill the objectives of Deen according to their sincerity and purity of intentions, even if their practices differed in some details.



Other differences are caused by some groups of Muslims not maintaining the balance among various parts of the Deen. For example, both personal purification and establishment of a society of Islamic excellence are equally important requirements of Deen. Some groups tend to concentrate on one to the detriment of the other. Likewise, many Muslims may concentrate on ritual aspect of the Pillars, overlooking their roles in the personal purification as well as the establishment of the Islamic society. Others may just talk about being kind and generous while disregarding the Pillars altogether. These difference need to be addressed by bringing back the balance and moderation of Islam in practising all part of the Deen with equal attention and care.



Unfortunately, the problems happen when people take these differences to heart and start thinking in sectarian terms instead of looking from Deen’s paradigm. Many confusion and sectarian problems are actually caused by not differentiating between Deen and Sharee’ah.



Why the Distinction?



Although Sharee'ah is the natural corollary and the day-to-day practical side of the Deen, the distinction is necessary to adopt a moderate, balanced and correct attitude and understanding towards matters of Deen and Sharee'ah.



Properly understanding this distinction also helps us avoid extremist, unbalanced tendencies towards differences of opinion in Islamic matters. For example, one kind of extremists are those who create sects on the basis of just minor difference in matters of Sharee'ah. They are intolerant of even a slightly different opinion or practice. They are responsible for the majority of infighting, discord and friction among Muslims.



Then there are the extremists who comfortably swallow even the violations of the essence of Deen. They harbour, support, applaud and honour even those who attack the very basic tenets of Islam. In essence, they aid in the demolishing of the Deen.



What to do then?



The moderate, balanced approach is that:

We must clearly understand the Deen of Islam which constitutes the straight path, which has been always the Deen of Allaah and which has been briefly described above[1];
We must not compromise on the matters of Deen and we must maintain a healthy balance among all components of Deen;
We should respect and accept the differences of opinion and practices in Sharee'ah, while trying our best on personal level to remain in compliance with the Qur-aan and Sunnah, and not accepting anything or practising anything that is not clearly supported by the Qur-aan and Sunnah.
If we do the above, regardless of which sect we happen to belong to, we will automatically move towards the balanced way of Islam and its ‘straight path’ and we will be among the slaves of Allaah with whom He is pleased and to whom He will grant admission into His Jannah.

Wassalaamu Alaykum

Ayub Hamid



Footnotes:

[1] The Deen and its components have been described in detail, fully supported by the Qur-aan and Hadeeth, in my forthcoming book on Islam.

__________________________________________________ ____________________________________________

Karima-DDN