رتبها

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
al-Asha'ira, and their position on al-Khabar al-Wahid 🧵
تهافت صبي من صبيان الوهابية فيما يدعيه على أئمة الإسلام والأشعرية

The position of the Asha'ira on Ahad Hadith (synonymous to Khabar Wahid) is clear and known, and this slander can only come from someone ignorant of the very basics of our creed, ignorant of what our scholars wrote, and ignorant of Islamic history.
As shall be shown, إن شاء الله.

The Asha'ira said it very simply, Khabar al-Wahid does not grant certainty, it is not 1000% that the Prophet ﷺ said it.
Thus, the one who rejects it is not a Kafir for disbelieving in something our Prophet ﷺ said, only a Fasiq.
Meaning, Aqa'id do not get based on Ahad Hadith.

What are Aqa'id?
They are what differentiates a Muslim from a Kafir.
Everyone agrees that the one who rejects Qiyamah is a Kafir
What about someone who rejects something that came to us in Ahad? Like the Hawd of the Prophet ﷺ in the Akhira
Rejecting it is not Kufr, only Fisq

So the Asha'ira said it is Wajib to act on and believe in Khabar Wahid, even though it does not grant certainty.
And since it does not grant certainty, we would not establish Takfir on someone who rejects it.

Hujjat al-Islam al-Imam al-Ghazali says that whatever is established by Qat' (Tawatur), it is Wajib to believe in it with Qat' (certainty).
And if something is Dhanni (Ahad), it is Wajib to believe in, yet not to the same level of Tawatur. (No Takfir of the one who rejects it)

al-Kamal Ibn al-Humam in al-Musayara agrees with al-Ghazali and splits them into 2;
What there is certainty on like knowledge of Allah and His attributes
What there is not certainty on like some conditions of Prophethood, questioning in the grave...
Both are to be believed in.

Shaykh al-Mutakallimin Ibn Furak al-Shahid says that it is Wajib to accept the Akhbar of upright narrators even though it does not give certainty.

al-Bukhari in his commentary on al-Bazdawi's Usul responds to some who used Ayat of the Quran to discard Ahad Hadith
Certainty is not needed for belief

al-Sarkhasi in his Usul says that Khabar al-Ahad is Wajib to act on even though it does not give certainty.
But the Usul, that there cannot be doubt in, are only established by Tawatur.

al-Sayf al-Amidi says that the Usul of the religion is what certainty is needed in

Shaykhuna Hasan Hito summarizes and explains all these texts
What the Asha'ira meant by Aqa'id not being established except by Tawatur is the Aqa'id that differentiate a Kafir from a Muslim
Ahad Hadith however is mandatory to believe in

This is similar to how the Ahnaf who differentiate between Fard and Wajib
Fard is what is established by certainty and rejecting it is Kufr
Wajib is not established by certainty rejecting it is Fisq
Yet both Fard and Wajib are mandatory and the one who leaves them is a sinner.

These and many other texts show clearly how the Asha'ira did not intend discarding Ahad Hadith, and it is simply a semantic game of what is considered Aqidah.
This would have been easy to spot had the brother bothered to look into this issue.

Had he picked up the most basic of books of the Asha'ira, he would have noticed that the third section of our books (after Ilahiyyat and Nubuwwat) is Sami'yyat
Issues that are related to Ghayb that we can only know by Shar'
Funnily enough, most of this is based on Ahad Hadith

So no, the Asha'ira did not reject Khabar Wahid and anyone who claims this against us is a slanderer who deserves the punishment of slander, after he is educated and called to repentance.
We accepted them, took care of them, transmitted them and explained them.

As for these quotes that have been explained above, let us show how in these same books, the Imams accepted Khabar Wahid and believed in them.

al-Razi in Ta'sis ul-Taqdis frequently mentions issues that are established solely in Ahad Hadith, and he interprets them correctly, unlike the Karamiyyah he was against
Why didnt Razi say these are Ahad and should be thrown out immediately? Simple, he didnt discard Khabar Wahid

al-Juwayni in al-Irshad says that the Sirat and the Mizan and the Hawd are all Haqq, as has been established in (Ahad) Hadith
Why is Juwayni describing the Sirat with what was transmitted in Ahad if he rejects them?

Abd ul-Qahir al-Baghdadi writes a chapter on affirming the Hawd, Sirat, Mizan and the questioning in the grave
Quote: "Which the Jahmiyyah rejected"

He carries on:
"We say to those who rejected the Hawd, may Allah not feed them from it.
And to those who rejected the Sirat, may they fall from it
These are all established from Akhbar (that are Ahad)"
Why is he defending Ahad Hadith when he rejects them? Is he not a Quranist?

al-Ghazali wrote a whole chapter on accepting what comes from the Sam', including when it is in Ahad.
Claiming this at this point is absolutely ridiculous

What al-Ghazali said that the Nass cannot contain what contradicts Ma'qul is nothing but the truth
What is rationally impossible (المحال عقلا) cannot exist, and since it cannot exist, it cannot be in the Quran or Sunnah...

Now that we have established (2) is incorrect, on to (1)

The Asha'ira were not alone in claiming Ahad Hadith does not give certainty,
Shaykh ul-Islam wa-l Mujaddid Ibn Baz agreed with the heretic Hadith-rejector Asha'ira on this, as did the famous Salafi site IslamQA

In fact, someone by the name of Ibn Taymiyyah who some might not be familiar with also said this, Ahad Hadith in itself does not give certainty.
Audhubillah right.

(3) and (4) are almost laughable
No one disagrees that an Ahad Hadith that contradicts the Quran is discarded for Shudhudh (abnormality)

If an Ahad Hadith can be discarded from a slightly stronger Ahad Hadith, what about when this Ahad Hadith contradicts Tawatur?
This is simple Mustalah, what you might learn from 2 hours at the feet of a Shaykh. Inshallah at least this much effort is put in next time.

It is unequivocal that the Asha'ira dominated the fields of Mustalah al-Hadith and Shuruh al-Hadith.
All the famous Shuruh of Hadith come from Asha'ira, all the famous Mustalah books come from Asha'ira
Why is it that Hadith rejecters were so invested in something they rejected?

When someone wants to learn Mustalah, they go to Ibn Salah al-Dimashqi, Ash'ari
Or Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ash'ari
Or Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Ash'ari
Or al-Nawawi al-Dimashqi, Ash'ari

When you go to Shuruh of Hadith, you go to Qadi Iyad, Nawawi, Ibn Hajar, Khattabi, Kirmani, Qastalani, al-Ayni, Ibn al-Arabi al-Maliki, Suyuti.... All Ash'ari.

Why is it all these Hadith rejecters paid any attention to Khabar Wahid?
You tell me.

Note*
The only contradiction is the one in the mind of someone who honestly believes the Asha'ira do not accept Ahad Hadith

To summarize,
The Asha'ira did not reject Khabar Wahid
They did not count Dhann to be part of Aqa'id
What are Aqa'id? They are what differentiates a Kafir from a Muslim

Lastly, I advise the author of this slander on the Jumhur of the Muslimin to repent to Allah and take back his slander publicly, or simply delete the slander and refrain from echoing it repeatedly.

Slandering the Jumhur and accusing them of their religion is a dangerous game. How will one stand in front of all the great Ulama' with what this slander that he attributes to them?
Fear Allah.
وآخر دعوانا أن الحمد لله رب العالمين.

التصنيفات

المزيد من هذا الكاتب

مواضيع ذات صلة

الأكثر اعجابا

التصنيفات

المزيد من هذا الكاتب

مواضيع ذات صلة

الأكثر اعجابا

فك الثريد