Choosing an Aqeedah?

[abdushakur]

A layperson would have heard of the aqeedah in islam which is comprised of statements of belief based upon authentic ayahs from the quran and ahadith.

however he/she may have also come across a number of 'different' aqeedahs within the sunni muslim ummah.

for example, the three most well-known would be the aqqedah at-tahawiyya, the aqeedah al-ashariyyah and the aqeedah al-maturidiyyah.

so why is there more than one aqeedah within sunni scholarship? dont we all have iman in the same core things? what are the differences? and when faced with a choice of aqeedahs, which one do we adopt and say we have full faith in?

surely there can be no taqleed in aqeedah?

[Mossy]

Well.. You can see some of the differences in this thread:

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=716

The majority of the stuff with regards to aqeedah is taken to be self-evident. In some parts though, can you really say that one is more correct than the other? As long as you get the basics down (books, unity of Allah (swt), angels, prophets, qadr etc) you should be fine.

[abdushakur]

so which one do u recommend i do taqleed on? :D

[Mossy]

I recommend you stick with the basics of faith and leave out the extraneous bits such as those highlighted there. If you want to get into the niggledy bits, pick a Maturidi scholar (as most of these are Hanafi) and go through it with them.

No taqleed in aqeedah ;)

[abdushakur]

well ive got the basics done.

ive read thru aqeedah at-tahawiyyah a few times and it seems sound to me....mainly bcos the forward says its agreed upon by almost EVERYONE.
so as im not a scholar im gonna say that my aqeedah is as tahawi.

is that ok?

or shouldnt i be saying my aqeedah is maturidi bcos i am also hanafi?




to be straight with u, id love to adopt the ashari aqeedah bcos i heard that that aqeedah is unique from the other two mentioned above in that it teaches that a non-muslim will go to jannah if he/she was never presented with the true message of islam during their lifetime.

id love this to be true.
it would mean that my work colleagues will be jannatis....bcos ive tested the waters and i know they are ignorant of islam....so if they remain like that then they will end up in jannah.....rather than jahannum for not being muslim as taught by the maturidis/tahawis.
[just an example.....i wish jahannum on no man]

do u see the predicament?

[Mossy]

Just follow the positions from any and say you have the aqeedah of Ahlu-Sunnah wal-Jama'ah. Nobody really has any business asking you what your aqeedah is though - your beliefs are your own and you'll be fine as long as you stick to respectfully agreed upon positions.

[abdushakur]

so can i put my aqeedah at-tahawi book aside....and adopt the ashari aqeedah instead?
bcos IMHO it does resonate with my own feelings....


is it as simple as that?







ps. im not playin devils advocate here.

[Mossy]

Aqeedah at-tahawi agrees with Ashari aqeedah in its form, does it not? Same core, different forms of expression, take from any.

Series of lectures here: www.zamzamacademy.com covering the various bits.

But yeah - your belief, so it's whatever convinces you *personally*.

[abdushakur]

hey thanx for that link....ive checked the site and it looks good....the problem is that i dont have the software to listen to the audios and the tahawi pdf doesnt seem to download either.


the difference in 'expression' between the aqeedahs is subtle but far-reaching, surely?

i havent read in tahawiyah that a non-muslim will reside in jannah out of Allah ta'Ala's mercy providing he hadnt been presented with the complete message of islam during his lifetime....but ive been told this is an ashariyyah view.

if i was a revert with non-muslim parents i would so so dearly want the ashari aqeedah to be the only true aqeedah as that would mean my islam-ignorant parents would end up in jannah with me inshallah.....whereas if i had certainty upon the tahawiyah aqeedah being the only truth then id be sweating bigtime trying to make my parents utter the shahdah b4 death.

big consequences arising from a 'small' difference.

u see where im coming from?

[Mossy]

Yep, I touched on it in the first thread I linked. In the end, if the scholars have disagreed on these points, then it really is up to you to decide which you *believe* to be the correct one. There really is no way of telling which one is *definately* the correct way of going about things as the evidences aren't supremely qati.

We can allocate away responsibility in some things, but in the end we all stand alone. G'luck.

[abdushakur]

it really is up to you to decide which you *believe* to be the correct one.

We can allocate away responsibility in some things, but in the end we all stand alone. G'luck.

i got a hunch that aqeedah al-ashariyya is the one.
do u think i will get ostracised by my fellow hanafis for letting go of my maturidi roots? can i be like 'hanafi' in madhab but 'ashari' in aqeedah? is there a link somewhere that i must uphold - so as not to be accused of picking and choosing in deen?

its a confusing thing.

[Mossy]

i got a hunch that aqeedah al-ashariyya is the one.
do u think i will get ostracised by my fellow hanafis for letting go of my maturidi roots? can i be like 'hanafi' in madhab but 'ashari' in aqeedah? is there a link somewhere that i must uphold - so as not to be accused of picking and choosing in deen?

its a confusing thing.

No, there have been Hanafi Asharis. Most are maturidi mainly as that's what was taught (well, plus other factors like the source derivation was closer due to hsi position etc..). You can be whatever you like in aqeedah (with respect to accepted aqeedah) and if anyone castigates you for it, then they are just plain rude and out of line. It shouldn't really come up unless you start debating niggly details.

Picking and choosing in fiqh is one thing - choosing in aqeedah is quite another. If you don't believe it, how can it be a foundation of your belief? Hmm.

[Omar HH]

Aqeedah at-tahawi agrees with Ashari aqeedah in its form, does it not? Same core, different forms of expression, take from any.

Series of lectures here: www.zamzamacademy.com covering the various bits.

But yeah - your belief, so it's whatever convinces you *personally*.

Technically the Aqeedah al-Tahawiya is more Maturidi-leaning because it disagrees with the Asharis on some minor points.

But the text is so basic that it basically agrees with both schools.

Yet one must be wary of "Salafi literalist commentary" on it.

Also look at,

http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/AG_FIB/default.htm
Al-Ghazali's Book of Belief

[Omar HH]

i got a hunch that aqeedah al-ashariyya is the one.
do u think i will get ostracised by my fellow hanafis for letting go of my maturidi roots? can i be like 'hanafi' in madhab but 'ashari' in aqeedah? is there a link somewhere that i must uphold - so as not to be accused of picking and choosing in deen?

its a confusing thing.

The Asharis and Maturidis are essentially the same thing. The codifying of the aqeedah of as-Salaf as-Salihoun. Both, by definition, are Ahlul Sunnah wa' Jama'ah, so it really doesn't matter.

What you'll be disagreeing on is 12 minor points.

It's not like people are going to be like "whats your aqeedah?"

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[Idrees]

so brother mossy you said its your choice because they is a difference of opinion.

I was wondering then will both views be accepted by Allah in the next world, or will only one be correct?

i'm confused, if they are difference of opinions does that mean they are all correct and no1 will be punished or are they correct according to us here based on the knowledge we have.

What i am trying to say is, is they only 1 correct view according to Allah. or all the different views accepted as correct to Allah, will anyone be punished if they are wrong?

[Mossy]

Well, look at most of those points they disagree on.. How many of them really pertain to your actions and intentions, on which you'll be judged? Being male is a condition for being a Nabi? Who cares.

They agree on the major points, that's the main thing. The furu are not required.

[Idrees]

no sorry i made it sound like i was referring to this post.

I was referring to in general on all the stuff they is difference of opinion (which is quite a lot) i was wondering if all the different views are correct or is just one view accepted by Allah.

[Omar HH]

"As a side point, we would note that this particular point (about whether laws
are arbitrary or whether acts are intrinsically "right" and "wrong") is the
major point of difference between the `Ash`ari and Maturidi schools." - Shaykh Abu Qanit al-Hassani.

[Omar HH]

Answer these questions:

1) Does faith (iman) increase and decrease or does iman stay the same (you either have it or you don't) but piety (taqwa) increases and decreases?

2) Can knowledge of Allah (SWT)'s existence be known through reason alone or must it be known through revelation?

3) Is the human being incapable of sorting out if an action is good or evil; are actions only good or evil because Allah (SWT) makes them so.

If you answered:

1) Iman stays the same, taqwa increases and decreases
2) Through reason alone
3) Yes, no there are bad actions.

You are a Maturidi in those 3 things.

If you answered:

1) Iman increases and decreases through deeds.
2) Through divine revelation.
3) No, yes actions are only good or bad because Allah (SWT) makes them so.

You are an Ashari in those 3 things.

There is no taqleed in aqeedah.

As you can see all these points are not many. There are more points which I don't even know all of them probably.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[aMuslimForLife]

As Salaam Alaykum,

There is only one Aqidah, whether it is called Ashari, Maturidi or Athari it is all the same Aqidah. Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah. So of these three schools it doesn't matter which one you pick.

Aqidah Tahawi is a text of the tenets of belief, not a school of Aqidah. All the schools Agree with the soundness of this text.

Stay away from the Anthropormophic Salafi (Wahabi) school of Aqidah, the school of Ibn Taymiyyah.

Maa salaama,

aMuslimForLife

[Omar HH]

He is correct. There is only one aqidah. The Ashari, Maturidi, and Hanbali schools are all just different names for the same things really.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[Abdur_Rahman]

As Salaam Alaykum
waleykum asalam



Stay away from the Anthropormophic Salafi (Wahabi) school of Aqidah, the school of Ibn Taymiyyah.

Maa salaama,

aMuslimForLife
I heard this plenty of times and I hear some of the hardcore titled jihadi salafi who say about "Misconception" labelling of Ashari aqeedah as of the aqeedah of old, but it gets old with all the stereotypes, alhamdulillah the brothers I know who do not ascribe to Allah to human qualities. Furthermore I've seen being posted on this site that has been taken from 5 points of not being a salafi and I take it that they all speak for the muslims who call to the manhaj and also, it's truly amazing about covering up one's mistakes, we've really fallen short of the mark and just want our agenda to be recognized :rolleyes:

Oh well!

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

Bismillahi al-Rahmani al-Rahim,

A lay person who's Muslim will certainly follow what is right, since Allah honored him with al-Fitra - al-Tawhid al-Ikhas.

He therefore is a believer in Allah, subhanahu-wa ta'ala, being One, the Unique, there's no other God then Allah. And he/she, the Muslim(a), should then belief firmly in the Arkan al-Iman, and the Arkan al-Islam, and the Arkan al-Ihsan.

He/she should not bother him/herself with al-Tahawi, al-Ash'ari or al-Maturidi, since they are people who will not ascertain his/her entrance into Paradise or Hell..

A Muslim should read the Qur'an belief in all of it, not denying anything in it, accepting it and believing its appearent meaning insofar it is plain, and try to understand its inner meaning - preferably from a knowledgable person or from a well-known Tafsir.

The same with the Sunan.

If he/she likes to read and learn from an 'Aqidah he should take one book before any other book of the books of people: al-Sahih al-Bukhari. Learn the books of Kitab al-Iman, Kitab al-Tawhid and other 'books' in it, both the ahadith as the ayat, both the chapterheadings as the explanation in it.

Then he/she could also start reading from the Sunan/Musannaf books of the other Imams who authored the Kutub al-Sittah, for example Abu Dawud, al-Nasa'i and al-Tirmidhi.

Or he/she could begin reading Imam Malik's Muwatta, or al-Shafi'i's Risalah. They have also points of 'Aqidah in it - I would prefer al these books before starting reading the basic books of 'Aqida, because they are earlier, knowledgable and full of sayings of the Prophet sallallau 'alayhi wa-sallam.

Though there's no 'fitra' in following Bukhar, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Malik, al-Shafi'i and others - no doubt, a sincere Muslim who claims or associates or adheres or inclines to the Ahl al-Sunnah should follow these Imams footsteps in matters of both belief and practice.

Amma ba'd:

The First Imam who propagated and made famous the 'Aqidah of the Ahl al-Sunnah in such a way that he became one of the greatest - sometimes sole - reference, was: Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.

It behoves a Muslim to learn about the scholars of Islam, be it a lot or less. Then surely, if he reads the books of the Imams on Creed, he will come across this man, Imam Ahmad.

I would prefer learning the 'Aqidah from him before the later scholars - be they the three mentioned above, al-Tahawi, al-Ash'ari or al-Maturidi.

Thus, I would read his books, epistles, and sayings as reported by his students, followers and historians of Islam. I would then also learn about the context of these writings, his life and learning, and friends and foes.

If you have done that, then I think you would have grasped firmly that which Allah ordered us to grasp - the firm rope of Tawhid, the essence of 'Aqida.

Insha'Allah.

wa-Salamu Alaikum.

[Omar HH]

The Aqeedah al-Tahawaiyya has everything a Muslim needs to believe within it basically.

See http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/nuh/studyh.htm

Without a guiding hand, the untrained reader will misunderstand many of the hadiths he reads, and these mistakes, if assimilated and left uncorrected, may pile up until he can never find his way out of them, let alone become a scholar.

[abdushakur]

jazakallah khayr for the replies.

i have learnt something.


i had no real intention to make this a thread within the 'Debates' section but someone moved it into this section from the 'islam Q&A' section in which i originally posted it in.

my intention was to get a scholar to answer this question of mine as surely it is only the ulama who should delve into these matters of aqidah. is that not so?

i would appreciate it greatly if an alim could answer my original Q or this thread be moved back into the Q&A section.

[Ibn_Abi_Yala]

al-Salamu Alaikum,



Without a guiding hand, the untrained reader will misunderstand many of the hadiths he reads, and these mistakes, if assimilated and left uncorrected, may pile up until he can never find his way out of them, let alone become a scholar.

Indeed, but therefor I said:

"A Muslim should read the Qur'an belief in all of it, not denying anything in it, accepting it and believing its appearent meaning insofar it is plain, and try to understand its inner meaning - preferably from a knowledgable person or from a well-known Tafsir"

and then,

"The same with the Sunan"

So as it is obliged to any Muslim to recite and to listen to the Qur'an, so is it for the Sunan.

Therefor, there's nothing wrong with reading the ahadith which are Sahih, and 'accepting it and believing' whats in it - rather it is obligatory.

And, as I made a condition, 'insofar it is plain', such as the sayings: 'Islam is built on five..' or 'Iman is believing in..' and any other appearent saying of the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi-wa sallam, for he was the best orator, speaker, and preacher, with the best words, most easy for understanding and most sincere to the people.

An I made also another condition - i.e. if you can not understand it rightly - then you'll have to refer to someone knowledgeable.

So there's no danger in it - as there's no danger in reading and understanding the Qur'an al-Karim. Rather Allah, ta'ala, ordered us to read and ponder over it - which does not mean to indulge in speculation about its meanings, or rejecting what seems to be reasonable and vice versa - rather it means: accepting what's in it, believing in it, encouraging others to it, transmitting it, and understanding it insofar you'll understand its specific points - indeed, Allah, azza wa-jall, benefits those who learn!

wa-Salamu 'Alaikum.

[Omar HH]

Yes you are right, but hadith should not be read without a teacher or an authentic commentary in my opinion - just based upon the article of Shaykh Nuh.

Aqeedah al-Tahawiyahh get's it's sources from the hadith and Qur'an. And yes accepting the sahih as authentic and Qur'an as authentic is necessary to believe.

[Abdur_Rahman]

:salam:

What is the difference, this is all similar :confused:

This our Aqeedah (link) (http://stateofislam.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=228)

“Hadhihi Da’watunaa” (link) (http://www.al-ibaanah.com/cms/pdf_files/50.pdf)

Please can we have a mature discussion :insh: (I figure that we're adults here) with no mud-slinging everywhere :rolleyes: from what I've read and from these links above and what I've seen from this thread is that they are similar in their understanding.

[Idrees]

The differences between the two schools of aqida are minor and subtle--they are neither major nor practically significant. One should learn the basics in a practical, reliable manner, according to either school, and then busy oneself with increasing in one's good deeds--every sunna that one brings to life through one's actions increases the light in one's heart and strengthens the certitude of one's faith. It is this light and certitude that calls people to Islam, not mere words or theological nuances.
On the issue of non-Muslims: it is not true to affirm that the Ashari school holds that "non muslims wil go to paradise." Rather, the only difference is about those whom the message of Islam hasn't reached. And there is difference within the Ashari school as to what is considered sufficient for the message of Islam to have reached the person.
This is explained in the following answer:

The Fate of Non-Muslims in the Afterlife
Assalamu alaikum,

Sheikh Nuh Keller dealt with this in the attached article [from:
http://www.masud.co.uk <http://www.masud.co.uk/> , a brilliant site], a refutation of the idea of the 'universal validity of all religions,' saying:

5. The Fate of Non-Muslims in the Afterlife

The reason that contemporary writers affected by the writings of Gunon and Schuon, such as Chittick and Gai Eaton (or such as Martin Lings, Titus Burckhardt etc.), seem to want the universal validity of all religions at any price, even to the extent of attributing it to masters like Muhyiddin ibn al-`Arabi ("in principle") or Emir `Abd al-Qadir ("he protected the Christians against massacre by taking them into his own home because he understood" [as if other scholars considered massacring them halal]) would seem to be the emotive impalatability of followers of other religions going to hell. Where is the mercy? Would Allah put someone in the hellfire merely for worshipping in another religion besides Islam? This question is answered by traditional Islam according to two possibilities:

(1) There are some peoples who have not been reached by the message of the Prophet of Islam (Allah bless him and give him peace) that we must worship the One God alone, associating nothing else with Him. Such people are innocent, and will not be punished no matter what they do. Allah says in surat al-Isra',

"We do not punish until We send a Messenger" (Koran 17:15).

These include, for example, Christians and others who lived in the period after the spread of the myth of Jesus godhood, until the time of the prophet Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), who renewed the call to pure monotheism.

The great Muslim scholar, Imam Ghazali, includes in this category those who have only been reached with a distorted picture of the Messenger of Islam (Allah bless him and give him peace), presumably including many people in the West today who know nothing about Allah's religion but newspaper stories about Ayatollahs and mad Muslim bombers. Is it within such people's capacity to believe? In Ghazali's view, such people are excused until after they have had an opportunity to learn the undistorted truth about Islam (Ghazali: "Faysal al - tafriqa," Majmu'a rasa'il al-Imam al-Ghazali, 3.96). This of course does not alter our own obligation as Muslims to reach them with the da'wa.

(2) A second group of people consists of those who turn away from God's divine message of Islam, rejecting the command to make their worship God's alone; whether because of blindly imitating the religion of their ancestors, or for some other reason. These are people to whom God has sent a prophetic messenger and reached with His message, and to whom He has given hearing and an intellect with which to grasp it but after all this, persist in associating others with Allah, either by actually worshipping another, or by rejecting the laws brought by His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace), which associates their own customs with His prerogative to be worshipped as He directs. Such people have violated God's rights, and have accepted to go to hell, which is precisely what His messengers have warned them of, so they have no excuse:

"Truly, Allah does not forgive that any be associated with Him; but He forgives what is less than that to whomever He wills" (Koran 4:48).

In either case, Allah's mercy exists, though for non-Muslims unreached by the message, it is a question of divine amnesty for their ignorance, not a confirmation of their religions validity. It is worth knowing the difference between these two things, for one's eternal fate depends on it.
(end)

Wassalam,

Faraz Rabbani,
Amman, Jordan.

Shaykh Adib Kallas of Damascus, a master of the science of aqida who is well-versed in the nuances and texts of both schools of Sunni beliefs, made an interesting observation about the various positions about the fate of non-Muslims in the afterlife. He said,
“We know that those who reject faith (man aba) are in Hell. It is not decisively established what exactly entails rejection of faith—this is why the scholars of Sunni Islam differed. As for the details, we should concern ourselves with our own fate: Allah will ask us about ourselves, not about what He should do with others.”

And Allah alone gives success.
Wassalam,
Faraz Rabbani
www.SunniPath.com - http://blog.masud.co.uk/faraz.htm
"Verily, it is by the remembrance of God that hearts find contentment."

[Usman]

The basic beleifs of the Asharis,Maturidis, and some atharis, are the same. As Aqeedah is extracted from the Qur'an and Mutawatir Ahadeeth. However, the certain form of differences are in "Aytiqadaat", The books like Sharh Aqaid of Imam Tahawi(Rahimahullah), etc. explain the aitiqadaat as well as aqaid.

The Hanafis prefer the explanations of Imam Abu Mansoor Maturidi(Rahimahullah) over Imam Abul Hasan Al-Ashari(rahimahullah), just because Imam Ashari (RA) was a little much against the Mutazillah, not that he was wrong or something,just a matter of preferrence. The Shafiis give preferrence to Imam Abul Hasan (RA) ,because, to them, Imam Abul Hasan(RA) took extra measures to refute the mutazillah. etc. etc.

I, personally, do not involve in any kind of debates of Ilmul kalam, as I simply hate it.
The basic beleifs I hold regarding Allah are :
a) Allah is one, all knowing, all seeing.
b) He is on arsh, how is he? I don't know, and I don't care. If the Qur'an says, I take it as it is,la azeedu, wala anqusu.
c) NO one, deserves being worshiped, us seeking help, solving of problems, except Him.

So these are simple things, when the Sahabah(RA) got the glad tiding of Jannah, why should we get involved in these complicated issues?

Still, this is just my opinion. Correct me if Im wrong.

[Omar HH]

The basic differences arise on the fundamental debate between reason and revelation. One must remember even within the Ashari school (and probably the Maturidis, but I am not sure) there are dissenting opinions about subtle points.

The Asharis believe that the unaided human mind CANNOT find out that a certain act is good or bad without divine revelation saying it is good or bad. For example, the unaided human mind without revelation cannot find out that drinking wine is unlawful and bad, or not wearing the hijab is bad, or murder is bad, etc.

The Maturidis believe that the unaided human mind CAN find out the major things that are good and bad, such as drinking wine, murder, rape, etc.

There are some other subtle points.

There is no taqlid in aqidah.

And your right, as long as you know a basic aqidah text (like al-Tahawiyah, which is barely Maturidi) your fine.

Jazakallahu Khayrun

[abdushakur]

alhamdulillah there have been some nice, thought provoking replies to this thread.

i understand that there are indeed very subtle and some might say inconsequential differences in the 'various' aqeedahs in ahlul sunnah wal jamaah....but one 'difference' even tho some have termed it subtle....in my books it is a very great 'difference' indeed....if i understand the 'difference' correctly that is.

someone above said that the ashari's and maturidi's differ on the final abode of the non-muslim in the akhirah if he has not been shown the true message of islam.

he will be given a chance on yawmul qiyamah to obey his Lord and thereby attain jannah according to ashari's.

i know some may say, and they have, that who cares, this does not concern us, we should concentrate on our own iman and final destination rather than think too much about the fate of others.....but what if that 'other' was ur own mother, father or other loved one....a non-muslim mother....wouldnt u want to beleive that she will inshallah attain jannah if the message of islam had not reached her properly?
or would one want to believe that she died worshipping jesus and therefore has no chance and will burn in hell?

i personally know reverts and they forever are in anguish regarding their parents lack of islamic belief.

surely this so-called subtle point in aqeedah is a profound point for those who are 'affected' by it?

i hope my point is clearer.

[abdushakur]

actually.. this does have serious repurcussions for us Muslims as well

if the message hasnt reached someone... it means the Muslims havent made much effort to spread it.. hence indirectly.. for someone else's kufr we are responsible..... what if on the Day of Judgement a kafir is asked "Why didnt u believe?" He's gonna say "None ever told me!"..whatever his fate, we will be questioned on this too, "Why didn't u give him the message?"....

hope u get my point

yeah i do.

and a believer in the ashari aqeedah could quite easily say that their belief was that this person would be saved on qiyamah bcos he/she did not know about islam properly....whereas a maturidi couldnt.

therefore its safer and more prudent to be a ashari.

dya see the predicament?

its not a 'subtle' point i think....its a point which has ramifications in the akhirah....heavy.

[Mossy]

I think ultimately you have to kick back to the fact that Allah (swt) is Just and we have a set of rules/actions which we have to carry out personally as a part of our religion. All else will be resolved come Qiyamat and we can't know the exact circumstances for anyone - all we can know is that Justice will be delivered with a helping of Mercy.