- Shocking Convictions (BID'ATS)

6th of the diseases of the heart is to hold a bid'at, which

means to hold a sinful, off-base or deviant conviction. Most

Muslims experience the ill effects of this deplorable disease. The explanation which

leads one into this ailment is one's endeavor to excuse or

reason in the issues which can't be detected through sense

organs and which can't be reached or appreciated through

estimations and trusting in issues wherein reason blunders and

commits errors. Each Muslim ought to follow the lessons of

both of the two Madhhabs concerning confidence, i.e.,

"Mâturîdî" or "Ash'arî". Following the lessons of any of

them will shield or save an individual from the disease of blasphemies.

For, in issues past the compass of psyche, the researchers of (the

average and hence the main right way called) Ahl as-sunnat

followed just the Qur'ân al-kerîm and hadîth-I-sherîfs, accordingly

using their intellectual abilities in diving into these two sources

what's more, attempting to figure out their implications. They composed, in their

books, what they gained from the Ashâb-I-kirâm, who thusly

had obtained their strict learnings from the Courier of

Allah.

[An individual will turn into a skeptic in the event that he denies or questions

about something which is educated plainly in the Qur'ân al-kerîm or

in hadîth-I-sherîfs. Giving incorrectly implications to edicts

that are not instructed obviously and are accordingly dicey would be

"bid'at." An individual turns into an ahl al-bid'at on the off chance that he trusts in his

wrong translation or understanding. Be that as it may, if an individual

rejects the decrees by saying, for example, "How should

this occur! This couldn't be! My psyche doesn't acknowledge that!",

he will end up being a skeptic. Assuming an individual declares that a denied

(harâm) thing is passable (halâl) and assuming his proclamation is based

on a âyat of the Qur'ân or on a hadîth, he doesn't turn into a

skeptic yet he turns into an "ahl al-bid'at." Expressing that the

appointment of hadrat Abû Bakr and Hadrat 'Umar to the post of

Caliphate was not right comprises a bid'at. Then again,

going further and expressing that they didn't have freedoms to the post

of Caliphate is incredulity (kufr).

Muhammad Shihristânî 'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' says in his

book Milal wa Nihal that the researchers of the Hanafî Madhhab

followed the lessons of imâm Abû Mansûr al-Mâturîdî

'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' as for confidence (i'tiqad). For, Abû

Mansûr al-Mâturîdî applied the procedure ("usûl" and

"furu") of Imâm a'zam Abû Hanîfa 'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ', the

pioneer behind the Hanafî Madhhab. "Usûl" signifies "i'tiqad" conviction.

"Furu" signifies "ahkâm-I-shar'iyya" or decides that depend on

Islamic regulations. The researchers of "Mâlikî", "Shâfi'î" and "Hanbalî"

Madhhabs followed the lessons of Imâm Abû Hasan al-Ash'arî

'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' regarding confidence (i'tiqad). Abû Hasan

al-Ash'arî followed the "Shâfi'î" Madhhab. Imâm al-Subkî

'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' who was one of the renowned "Shâfi'î"

researchers said that he had concentrated on the book of Abû Ja'far Tahâwî

'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' who was one of the researchers of the Hanafî

Madhhab, and saw that it was practically equivalent to the

lessons of the "Ash'arî Madhhab in confidence. They contrasted from

each other just in three focuses. Abdulwahhâb Tâj-ud-dîn al Subkî, who was the child of imâm abûl Hasan Alî Subkî

'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ', said that he had concentrated on the books of the

researchers of "Hanafî" Madhhab in confidence (i'tiqad) and saw that

they were in conflict with "Shâfi'î" Madhhab in confidence in

thirteen focuses. Yet, he said that their conflicts were on

minor matters and that those distinctions didn't imply that they

had digressed from the right way. They don't vary in

fundamental matters. The two of them are in the right (haqq) way.

Muhammad Hadimî 'rahimahullâhu ta'âlâ' states in the three

hundred and seventeenth page of his book Berîqa that he has

concentrated on the lessons of both 'Mâturîdî and Ash'arî Madhhabs in

credal matters and assessed that the errors between the

two Madhhabs, including the extremely minor contrasts, amounted to

seventy-three.]