Who are Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah?

Samir Hussain
38–57 minutes

بسم الله الرحمان الرحيم

Before reading this article you should know I have not written it to argue with you.

This article is written for those who are of sound intellect, level-headed & wise, and understand that truth is not so easily condensed into the angry rhetoric & slogans of half-studied preachers & ‘shaykhs’ who couldn’t parse an Arabic sentence correctly (or at all), let alone bother to learn Islam & Islamic theology extensively before speaking about it.

This article is written for those willing to listen with an open mind, and who know that it is erroneous to have preconceived notions about what is true or false before one has taken the time and made the effort to learn.

This article is written for those looking to unite & heal the ummah, not to divide & destroy it to satisfy the ego in thinking that they are correct while the majority – even if they are recognized & celebrated scholars – are wrong.

If you belong to one or more of these categories, I want to remind you; the truth is more worthy of being followed. It is human to have not known something and to have had mistaken beliefs & erred as a result. It is also human to recognize that one was wrong and to correct oneself.

This article started as a translation of a part of a book by Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i, however I added significant sections in here that makes it as much my own as it is his. The book by Sh. Abdul Fattah, al-Manhajiyyah al-A’ammah was given to me at a critical time in my studies. I was already in the midst of my studies & on the verge of realizing that my former understandings of who are ‘Ahlus-Sunnah’ in Islamic theology were heavily skewed by a selective interpretation of the facts. But when Sh. Abdul Wahab Saleem sent it to me & advised me to read it in one sitting, I realized immediately that the approach of this book was the right one.

Often, we become too invested in our understanding, try too hard to convince our discussant of the truth, and don’t let the facts speak for themselves. Our passion becomes our reason for failure.

Instead, give people the facts, and let them make up their own mind. If they reject facts, it is their doom, not yours. You don’t have to win the argument, you just have to spread the truth, one kernel at a time. This is why I started with this book. It lets the facts speak for themselves. I may translate other parts of it later if I see benefit in it & Allah wills & allows me to live long enough.

O Allah allow make us see the Truth as the truth and make us followers of it, and make us see Falsehood as falsehood and make us stay away from it.

The Three Madhhabs of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah

1.01 – What is ‘Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah’?

The Prophet SAW said, “The Children of Israel split into 71 or 72 sects, and the Christians similarly so, and my ummah will split into 73 sects.” [Tirmidhi, Ibn Hibban, Hakim & others]

In another variation, the Prophet SAW said, “The People of the Book split in their religion into 72 sects, and this ummah will split into 73 sects, all of them in the Fire except one, and it is the Jama’ah (i.e. the Majority)…” [Abu Dawud & Ahmed]

In other variations the Prophet SAW mentions that this ‘saved sect’ is “What me and my Companions are upon,” or “The masses (al-sawad al-a’dham.” However the previous two variations seem to be the stronger variations as per the scholars of hadith.

This ‘saved sect’ became known as Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. I.e. those who follow the Sunnah (as opposed to bid’ah or innovations in belief), and those who are the Jama’ah (i.e. the majority). As per the wording of the hadith, this is opposed to those who follow innovated beliefs that are not from the Sunnah of the Prophet SAW, and/or those who are not part of the majority of Muslims.

Who is ‘the Jama’ah or majority’ here? Al-Shatibi in al-I’tisam mentions the following views:

  1. They are all of the following: the highest level scholars (mujtahids) of the ummah, the scholars, the people of the Shariah & those who act upon it, and those who follow all of these people. This was the view of Ibn Masud & Abu Mas’ud al-Ansari RAD.
  2. That the Jama’ah the high level (mujtahid) scholars specifically. This is different from 1) in that it excludes the masses and the pious who are non-scholars. This was the view of Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, Ishaq ibn Rahuyah & the scholars of usul-ul-fiqh. (Under this view, when the Prophet SAW said ‘my ummah will not unite upon misguidance’, the meaning is that the ummah’s scholars will not unite upon misguidance).
  3. The Jama’ah are the Companions specifically. This was the view of Umar ibn Abdil Aziz, and Imam Malik praised him for it.
  4. The Jama’ah are Muslims as a whole when they unite upon something. This was the view of Imam al-Shafi’i, and likely means the same as the first.*
  5. The Jama’ah are Muslims when they unite upon a righteous ruler. This was teh view of al-Tabari, and this brings the concept into a political, rather than theological sphere.

*Note: To believe that Muslims as a whole when they unite upon something is what is meant by ‘Jama’ah’ here is likely incorrect, which is why al-Shatibi said it likely means the same as the first view. It is highly unlikely this is what Imam al-Shafi’i meant. Especially in our time, where the Muslim ummah is affected by so many problematic beliefs, practices & sin, it doesn’t make sense.

1.02 – Ahlus Sunnah are of three madhhabs or ways in theology:

The Madhhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. The followers of this madhhab are called (or call themselves) Hanbalis, Atharis or Ahlul-Hadith.

The Madhhab of Imam Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari. The followers of this madhhab are called (or call themselves) Ash’aris.

The Madhhab of Imam Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. The followers of this madhhab are called (or call themselves) Maturidis or Hanafis.

1.03 – Sh Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i says, “When weighing out these three madhhabs there is no doubt that the safest and most correct is the madhhab of the Ahlil-Hadith and their way is the one that this poor servant is pleased with for himself.* I am not an Ash’ari or a Maturidi, rather on the madhhab of the Ahlil-Hadith and their way & I do not desire any replacement or change of that.

However despite that I say, after the emergence of the madhhab of Imam Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari & Imam Abu Mansur Al-Maturidi you will barely find anyone from the people of knowledge, from the scholars of tafsir, fiqh, usul, theology, Arabic language, Muslim leaders & the righteous except that they are from the Ash’aris or the Maturidis.“

Note: While I cannot claim to be an Athari in every single belief I hold, I do still strongly advocate for it being the safest & most natural madhhab that is most suitable for the vast majority of Muslims. Most Muslims should not burden themselves with rational theology, unless they are more intellectually-oriented or more exposed to doubts in their faith than others. However despite this, the fact that the vast majority of scholars in the Hanafi, Shafi’i and Maliki madhhabs over Islamic History were followers of either the Ash’ari or Maturidi madhhabs (with some Hanbalis) is enough testament that they are not incorrect.

1.04 – Two Tiered Orthodoxy*

A response I have heard to the above often is, “How can there be multiple correct theologies, especially when the Prophet SAW said there will only be ONE ‘saved sect’?”

The response to this is simple in theory. Orthodoxy in theology in similar to orthodoxy in fiqh. All scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah agree on a foundational layer or inner core of beliefs that are primary in determining what is ‘Ahlus-Sunnah’ or Orthodox Sunni Theology. This is the first tier and comprises of beliefs in both theology & fiqh. Differing in these issues may result in a scholar being removed from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah or even from Islam.

This tier is informed by 3 aspects:

  1. The apparent wordings of sacred text that are non-figurative & explicit in meaning e.g. the existence & descriptions of Heaven & Hell in the Qur’an.
  2. The category of concepts that are ‘known by necessity in religion’, the denial any of which is kufr (unless out of ignorance) e.g. that there is no Messenger after Muhammad SAW (the belief of the Ahmadiyyah), or that Allah creates and sustains the universe without the means of any intermediaries like metaphysical Imams (the belief of the Ismailis). It also includes fiqh rulings like the obligation of the 5 daily prayers and the obligation of Zakat.
  3. The category of concepts that are scholarly consensus & known with certainty (i.e. Ijma’ Qat’i). One difference between this category and the previous one is that the previous one should be known by all Muslims, whereas this category may be known only by scholars. Also, knowingly denying an issue from the previous category is an act of disbelief, whereas knowingly denying an issue from this category is haram i.e. sinful.

The second tier are issues of ikhtilaf, resulting from the ijtihad (scholarly reasoning) of scholars in both theology & fiqh. It is the natural result of scholars interpreting sacred text that are dhanni ul-dalalah i.e. whose implications in meaning are not known with certainty, rather with probability. Differing in these issues DOES NOT result in a scholar being removed from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. This is also applicable to both theology & fiqh.

There are different types. Here are a few examples:

  1. Differing interpretations based on application of rules in the Arabic Language. Examples of these are how ‘istiwa’ i.e. the idea of Allah ‘ascending’ is interpreted in the Qur’an, or how ‘lams’ i.e. touching the opposite gender is interpreted in the context of what breaks the wudu.
  2. Differing interpretations based on how different wordings & chains of authority in hadith are put together. Examples of these include differing views on the signs of the Last Day & the order of events of the major signs. Another example is whether one should recite the basmalah out loud in prayer or whether the followers behind the Imam should recite the Fatihah or not.
  3. Different sources of evidence for interpretation. For example the Hanafis, Malikis & Hanbalis all include the fatwas/narrations of the Companions as evidence in fiqh, whereas the Shafi’is do not. Another example is how Ash’aris & Maturidis allow for the use of reason as a source in theology, whereas the Atharis/Hanbalis do not.
  4. Differences in how to reconcile strong rational arguments with sacred text. Specific to theology, this is the source of differing between scholars of Kalam who were sympathetic to the Hanbali positions, like Ibn Taymiyyah, and those who were sympathetic to the Ash’ari or Maturidi positions like al-Razi & al-Ghazzali. All approved of the use of reason in theology, but differed on how to reconcile between it & sacred text.
  5. Whether or not scholars as a whole approved of the differing as a valid, orthodox difference of opinion. What other scholars said about a particular ikhtilaf is authoritative, as they are the inheritors of the Prophets, and as the Prophet SAW said, they are collectively protected from error. The vast majority of scholars accepted the Ash’ari & Maturidi madhhabs as valid, but rejected others, such as the Mu’tazilah & Jahmiyyah, and they claimed that they violated the first tier instead of falling into the second tier.

In theory, this is a simple understanding of Orthodoxy. In practicality however, this can get complicated, and scholars may differ on whether a particular issue of ikhtilaf is in violation of the first tier or second tier. This means that what one scholar considered a bid’ah or innovation in theology, another scholar may not. This is one of the reasons why scholars of hadith warned about using bid’ah in haste to disqualify narrators as being reliable. Just because a claim is made of a certain belief being bid’ah it does not mean this is immediately the case.

In summary, the Ash’aris. Maturidis & Ahlul-Hadith all agreed on the basic first tier of beliefs that are subject to explicit meanings of sacred text and are known in the religion by necessity. However they differed in the details. which are the second tier, and their differing was not regarded as severe enough to warrant disqualification from being Ahlus-Sunnah and were instead treated as madhabs.

We will now see examples of scholars who explicity or implicitly outlined this.

*Note: Two-tiered orthodoxy is the terminology of Dr. Sherman Jackson that I have adopted and used in my own way.

Scholars from the Ahlul-Hadith & Hanbalis Who Affirmed That These Three Are Madhhabs

2.01 – Abu Ya’la al-Farra’ al-Hanbali d. said in al-Tabaqat al-Hanabilah (written by his son), “The scholars of the Ahlul-Hadith & the Ash’aris are agreed in consensus in their acceptance of these hadith. From them are those who understood them as they are worded, and these are the Ahlul-Hadith. From them are those who reinterpreted them (ta’wil) and they are the Ash’aris, and their reinterpretation of them implies their acceptance of them, because if they were invalid according to them they would have discarded them as other narrations are discarded. It has been narrated from the Prophet SAW that he said, ‘My ummah will not unite upon misguidance.’”

2.02 – Ibn ul-Wazir al-Yamani said in Al-Awasim wal-Qawasim, “The madhhab of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal & those like him from the Imams of hadith are two groups:

The first group are the Ahlul-Hadith and Athar, the followers fo the Sunnah & the salaf who forbid working with Kalam (i.e. Islamic philosophical theology as practiced by Ash’aris & Maturidis).”

Then Ibnul-Wazir continues to describe the Ahlul-Hadith, quoting al-Ghazzali’s description of the belief of the salaf in Iljam ul-Awwam & their censure of Kalam across many pages. Then he says:

“The second group are people of rational introspection in the knowledge of Kalam, logic and rationality, and they are of two groups: the Ash’aris…, and the second group among the scholars of Kalam are the Atharis, like Ibn Taymiyyah & his companions.* These are from the Ahlul-Hadith, and do not differ from the Ahlul-Hadith except in their preference for working with Kalam and going beyond in their [theological] expressions, and what this was group was unique in was working with fine & obscure details [of Kalam], and the scholars of hadith condemn them for that because it could lead to bid’ah, or blameworthy traits in religion.”

*Note: As can be seen in this excerpt, Ibnul-Wazir demonstrates that scholars of Kalam, both Ash’ari & Athari are extensions of the Imams of Hadith & the understanding of Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal. See my article on Ibn Taymiyyah, where I said he should be understood to be a scholar of Kalam, distinct from the Atharism of the Salaf.

2.03 – Ibn ul-Izz al-Hanafi said in his commentary on the creed of al-Tahawi, “In general, Ahlus-Sunnah, all from the four schools of fiqh and others from the salaf (first 3 generations of scholars) and khalaf (scholars from later genertaions) are agreed upon the fact that the speech of Allah is uncreated.

But after that, later scholars disputed [whether] the speech of Allah is [either] a meaning located in the essence [of Allah] or it is [written] letters and sounds that Allah speaks with after He was not speaking, or He has eternally been speaking if He willed, when He willed, and however He willed and [whether] the particular of [Allah’s] speech is eternal…” Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i then adds, “As you can see he stated that this ikhtilaf [which is between the Ahlul-Hadith the Ash’aris] is ikhtilaf between Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah.

2.04 – Mar’i al-Karami al-Hanbali d. said in Aqawil ul-Thiqat, “And the other group that affirmed the essential attributes [of Allah] like Seeing, Hearing, Knowledge, Power & Speech, is the madhhab of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, and from them are the followers of the four madhhabs. Then they differed in what is mentioned in sacred text of the [meaning] of the wording of Eyes, Hands, Faces, Self & Soul:

So one of the groups [within Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah] reinterpeted (i.e. ta’wil) them according to what is befitting of Allah’s majesty, and they are the majority of the scholars of Kalam from the later generations

And another group [within Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah] affirmed what Allah & His Messenger affirmed and understood them according to their apparent meanings and rejected [knowledge of their] modality and resemblance, saying that the affirmation of Allah the Exalted is affirmation of existence, not affirmation of modality, similarly is the affirmation of His attributes, they are affirmation of existence, not affirmation of [definitive] description or modality.” Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i adds, “As you can see again he stated that this ikhtilaf [which is between the Ahlul-Hadith the Ash’aris] is ikhtilaf between Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah.

2.05 – Abdul Baqi al-Hanbali said in al-A’ynu wal-Athar, “The groups of Ahlus-Sunnah are three: The Ash’aris, Hanbalis and Maturidis, as validated by the addition of the Hanbalis to the Ash’aris in many books of Kalam and in all the books of the Hanbalis.”*

2.06 – Muhammad al-Safaryini said in Lawami’ ul-Anwar, “Ahlus-Sunnah are three groups: the Atharis, whose Imam is Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the Asharis, whose Imam is Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari, and the Maturidis, whose Imam is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.”

He also said in a different place in the book, “Some scholars said, the ‘saved sect’ are the Ahlul-Hadith, i.e. the Atharis, Ash’aris & the Maturidis.”

2.07 – Al-Shati al-Hanbali said in his commentary on Al-Safaryini’s creed, “Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah are three groups: the Atharis, whose Imam is Ahmad ibn Hanbal, the Asharis, whose Imam is Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari, and the Maturidis, whose Imam is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi.”

2.08 – Al-Mardawi al-Hanbali said in his commentary on Ibn Taymiyyah’s Lamiyyah, “This creed is agreed upon by the Four Imams, may Allah be pleased with them and those from the salaf who have been narrated from in what preceded, all of them are upon the truth. [This is] despite what occured in ikhtilaf between the Sheikh Abu Hasan al-Ash’ari from the Shafi’is and others and Imam Abu Hanifah in other foundational issues in the religion, but they are minor [differences] that do not necessitate takfir (i.e. excommunication from Islam] or tabdi’ (i.e. excommunication from orthodoxy).”

2.09 – Sh. Salman al-Awdah (may Allah free him from the clutches of tyrants & oppressors) said in a fatwa – dated 29/06/1427 on the Islam Today website – in response to a question about whether it is permissible to work together with Ash’aris & Maturidis, “The answer to this is, The Ash’aris & Maturidis went against what is correct when they reinterpreted some of Allah the Exalted’s attributes. But they are from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah and not from the 72 misguided groups except for those who were excessive in their negation [of Allah’s attributes] and adopted the views of the Jahmites then they fall under the ruling of the Jahmites. As for the rest of the Ash’aris & Maturidis then they are not like that and they are excused for their ijtihad (scholarly reasoning) even if they made mistakes [in their pursuit of] truth.

It is permissible to work together with them in what is righteous & good and of taqwa. Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him, studied with many Ash’ari scholars, moreso he fought under the banner of the Mamluk rulers. The leaders of that time were mostly Ash’ari. Even the Mujahid leader, hero and martyr Nur-ul-Din al-Zinki & Salahuddin al-Ayyubi were Ash’ari as al-Dhahabi said in Siyar A’lam al-Nubala, and many other than them from the scholars, leaders and righteous. Moreso, most of the scholars of the Muslims and their Imams (i.e. in knowledge) were Ash’aris & Maturidis, like al-Bayhaqi, al-Nawawi, ibn al-Salah, al-Mizzi, ibn Hajr al-Asqalani, al-Iraq, al-Sakhawi, al-Zayla’i, al-Suyuti, moreso all the commentators on Sahih al-Bukhari were Ash’aris and many others.

Despite this people benefited from their knowledge, and approved of their virtue and status as Imam (i.e. leaders) in the religion, together with the fact that they are excused for what they did ijtihad in and erred. May Allah forgive them. The Khalifah al-Ma’mun was a Jahmi Mu’tazilite, as well as Al-Mu’tasim and al-Wathiq were misguided Jahmis. Despite that, non of the Imams of Islam ruled that it is impermissible to follow them in prayers, or fight under their banner in war. None of the Imams said it was impermissible to fight with al-Mu’tasim on the day of Umuriyyah, with the preponderance of Imams during that time like Ahmad [ibn Hanbal], al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ali ibnul-Madini, Yahya ibn Ma’in and others like them from the senior Imams of the third century Hijri. We have not heard of anyone who said it was impermissible to work together with them from those people, or forbade following them, or fighting under their banner. It is obligatory to adorn ourselves with the Adab of the salaf in those we disagree with. And Allah knows best, and Allah’s prayers be upon Muhammad & his Family and his Companions and peace [be upon him].”

This fatwa was then co-signed by:

  • Dr. Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdil-Fattah al-Qari’, the Rector of the faculty of Qur’an in Madinah University at that time.
  • Dr. Muhammad ibn Nasir al-Suhaybani, a teacher in the Prophet’s mosque during that time.
  • Dr. Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Ghunayman, the dean of graduate studies at Madinah University during that time.

Sh. Abdullah al-Ghunayman added, “This is a correct answer that hits the mark, and the Muslims cannot cope without it. [This] Ikhtilaf continues between the scholars, and it is not a cause for differing in the hearts & sectarianism. And the story of the Companions when they went to Banu Qurayzah is known and famous, as well as others.”

Scholars from the Ash’aris Who Affirmed that these Three are Madhhabs

3.01 – Taj-ul-Din al-Subki said in his commentary on Ibnul-Hajib’s creed, “Know that all of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah agree on one belief system of what is [rationally] necessary, possible & impossible, even if they differed in the ways & principles which lead to that. In general by way of induction they are three groups:

  • The first are the Ahlul-Hadith, and the first principles for their belief system are evidences from sacred text, the Qur’an Sunnah & scholarly consensus.
  • The second are the scholars of rational introspection and they are the Ash’aris & Hanafis* (i.e. Maturidis). The Sheikh of the Ash’aris is Abul-Hasan al-Ash’ari, and the Sheikh of the Hanafis is Abu Mansur al-Maturidi. They are agreed in [the usage of] rational first principles in every issue that sacred text is silent on, and the [usage of] textual first principles in what reason perceives the possibility of only, as well as other rational & textual [issues]. They agree upon all issues of creed except for a few.
  • The third are the scholars of spiritual revealing & unveiling, and they are the Sufis. Their first principles are [the same as] the Ahlul-Hadith & scholars of rational introspection in the beginning, [but] unveiling & spiritual knowledge in the end.”

*Note: The Ash’ari & Shafii madhabs in theology & fiqh and the Maturidi & Hanafi madhhabs in theology & fiqh were historically & philosophically so tightly intertwined that scholars would sometimes use the word ‘Hanafi’ to denote Maturidis, and ‘Shafi’i’ to denote Ash’aris.

3.02 – Murtada al-Zabidi said in Ithaf ul-Sadatil-Muttaqin, “What is intended by Ahlus-Sunnah are four groups: the scholars of hadith, the Sufis, the Ash’aris & the Maturidis.“

Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i adds, “There is no doubt that what al-Subki & al-Zabidi meant by Sufis are those who were upon the methodology of the salaf. As for those who deviated from that & claimed beliefs like the unity of Allah* (i.e. with creation) and the removal of ritual & legal obligation and other false beliefs then no doubt they are not from Ahlus-Sunnah, rather they are not from the people of Islam at all…”

*Note: I will briefly touch upon this issue at the end of this article.

3.03 – Adud ul-Din al-Iji said in al-Mawaqif, “These are the misguided sects that the Prophet SAW said are all in the Fire. As for the ‘saved sect’ that he said he & his Companions are upon, they are the Ash’aris, and the salaf from the scholar of hadith and Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah & their madhhabs are free from the bid’ah of these.

In both Section 2 & 3 I have omitted numerous examples that Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i has mentioned for brevity, includes comments by Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi, Ibn Taymiyyah & al-Dhahabi on how issues between the Hanbalis and Ash’aris/Maturidis did not exist at first, rather they used to work together and agree on their views with regards to heterodox groups (i.e. Ahlul-Bid’ah). As was the case then, and is the case now, these issues were started & intensified intentionally by politicians trying to set scholars & religious Muslims against each other for their own political ambitions & goals. Refer to Sh. Abdul-Fattah’s book, al-Manhajiyyah al-Aamah for more details. Both al-Dhahabi and Ibn Taymiyyah wrote about this history as well.

Examples of Widely Recognized Authorities of Islamic Knowledge in History who were Ash’ari or Maturidi

4.01 – The purpose of this section is to demonstrate – with only a limited range of the most famous or prominent examples – how dominant the Ash’ari & Maturidi madhhabs were in Islamic History. After reading this list, it should be clear how preposterous, nonsenical & outlandish it is to consider the Ash’ari & Maturidi madhhabs to be outside of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, as this means that the majority of the most prolific & well-recognized scholars for a thousand years did not understand Islamic theology properly, or they did not even belong to the ‘saved sect’ even though the Prophet SAW said that Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah will be the majority of the ummah!

Many on this list are not just senior scholars of Islam, but were considered to be from one of the types of mujtahid (there are different levels of ijtihad), especially some of the scholars of hadith & fiqh mentioned here. Their books, positions & conclusions make up the canonical & orthodox understandings in their fields.

Note: This list was taken from Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i, from whose book I quote heavily from in this article. The dates & biographical information are from me.

4.02 – Scholars of Tafsir or Ulum-ul-Qur’an who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs:

  • Abu Bakr al-Jassas d. 370 AH – the author of one of the first & best works of fiqh tafsir of the Qur’an, Ahkam-ul-Qur’an, as well as his famous work of Usul-ul-Fiqh in the Hanafi madhhab.
  • Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi d. 373 AH – The Hanafi scholar of tafsir who wrote Bahr-ul-Ulum & other works.
  • Abu Ishaq al-Tha’labi d. 427 AH – One of the most important scholars of tafsir whose work Al-Kashf wal-Bayan was used as a major reference by later scholars.
  • Abu Amr al-Dani d. 444 AH – the famous scholar of Qur’anic recitations, whose books the students of that field are well-acquainted with
  • Ibn ul-Arabi d. 468 AH – The great Maliki scholar of hadith, author also of another famous work in Ahkam-ul-Qur’an. Was a direct student of al-Ghazzali and even critiqued him.
  • Al-Wahidi d. 468 AH – Author of 3 massive works in tafsir, to this day some of the most important among scholar in tafsir.
  • Ilkiya al-Hirasi d. 504 AH – Shafi’i scholar of tafsir, also for fiqh-based tafsir.
  • Ibn Atiyyah d. 541 AH – Author of al-Muharrar al-Wajiz, and immensely important tafsir incorporated into the tafsir works of later scholars.
  • Fakhr ul-Din al-Razi d. ~604 AH – The author of a monumental, more philosophical tafsir of the Qur’an, al-Razi’s tafsir (together with al-Baydawi’s condensation of it) was a standard in the curriculums of Islamic seminaries around the Muslim world for many centuries.
  • Al-Qurtubi d. 671 AH – author of the famous Al-Jami Li Ahkamil-Qur’an which is the largest fiqh based tafsir written.
  • Al-Baydawi d. ~685 AH – Wrote Anwar ul-Tanzil, the most studied, commented on and taught tafsir in Islamic History. Hundreds of commentaries were written on this work, most still in manuscript form, some printed.
  • Al-Nasafi d. 710 AH – Famous Hanafi scholar of tafsir who wrote many beneficial works other than his tafsir.
  • Abu Hayyan d. 745 AH – The prolific scholars of the Arabic language & author of al-Bahr al-Muhit, a massive work in tafsir that specializes in semantic analysis of the Qur’an.
  • Al-Zarkashi d. 794 AH – The Shafi’i polymath who wrote extensively in many subjects, al-Zarkashi is also known for writing one of the first two dedicated books in Ulum-ul-Qur’an, al-Burhan.
  • Ibn ul-Jazari d. 833 AH – The legendary master of Qur’anic recitations whose works in tajwid & qira’at are studied by junior & senior students of Qur’anic recitation all over the world to this day. You cannot get an ijazah in the 10 recitations of the Qur’an without his isnad.
  • Jalal-ul-Din Al-Mahalli d. 864 AH – The Shafi’i polymath who co-wrote the famous work studied around the world, Tafsir ul-Jalalayn.
  • Al-Suyuti d. 911 AH – Co-author of Tafsir ul-Jalalayn, but also author of his own many narration-based enyclopedic works in Tafsir considered major references for scholars after him.
  • Al-Alusi d. 1270 AH – Famous Ottoman scholar of tafsir, author of Ruh-ul-Ma’ani.
  • Jamal-ul-Din Al-Qasimi d. 1332 AH – The famous Syrian reformer & scholar, author of Mahasin-ul-Ta’wil, a 12 volume tafsir of the Qur’an that he spent 15 years writing, considered one of the best modern works of tafsir written, along with the next in this list.
  • Al-Zurqani d. 1367 AH – Author of Manahil-ul-Irfan, one of the most celebrated works of Ulum-ul-Qur’an written in the past century.
  • Ibn Ashur d. 1393 AH – Author of al-Tahrir wal-Tanwir, a masterpiece in Tafsir which proves that legendary works in the Islamic sciences can still be written in this era.
  • And many, many more.

4.03 – Scholars of Hadith who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs:

  • Al-Daraqutni d. 385 AH – One of the most celebrated scholars of hadith in Islamic History, one of the only scholars whose critique of a few hadith in al-Bukhari & Muslim are accepted as canonical.
  • Al-Khattabi d. 388 AH – the Shafi’i scholar of hadith who authored some of the first commentaries on hadith works, the most famous being Ma’alim al-Sunan, a commentary on Sunan Abi Dawud.
  • Al-Hakim d. 405 AH – Author of famous works like al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihayn, Tarikh Nisabur & Ma’rifat Ulum-il-Hadith.
  • Abu Nu’aym al-Asbahani d. 430 AH – Author of Hilyatul-Awliya’.
  • Ibn Battal d. 449 AH – author of one of the earliest commentaries on Sahih al-Bukhari.
  • Al-Bayhaqi d. 458 AH – Author of the famous al-Sunan al-Kubra and many other beneficial works in hadith.
  • Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi d. 463 AH – author of Tarikh Baghdad, a massive history work compiling historical information from the Prophet SAW until his time. Also a prolific author in the sciences of hadith whose writings became references for everyone after.
  • Al-Qadi Iyad d. 544 AH – Author of Mashariq-ul-Anwar, a core reference used by later commentators on Sahih al-Bukhari for difficult vocabulary in it.
  • Ibn Asakir d. 571 AH – Author of the massive Tarikh Dimishq, who also wrote defense of al-Ash’ari from his critics. His recension of al-Bukhari’s Sahih is included within current printed editions of al-Bukhari.
  • Ibn ul-Qattan d. 628 AH – One of the greatest scholars of hadith from North Africa.
  • Ibn al-Salah d. 643 AH – the author of the famous Muqaddimah in the sciences of hadith which became the most studied, commented and discussed text in the sciences of hadith after him.
  • Al-Mundhiri d. 656 AH – Author of al-Targhib wal-Tarhib.
  • Al-Nawawi d. 676 AH – Author of a famous commentary on Sahih Muslim, as well as many other beneficial works in hadith & its sciences.
  • Ibn Daqiq ul-Eid d. 702 AH – wrote the most famous commentaries on Umdatul-Ahkam, such as al-Ilmam & others.
  • Ibn al-Zamlakani
  • Badr ul-Din ibn Jama’ah d. 733 AH – Famous Shafi’i scholar of hadith, author of many valuable works.
  • Al-Mizzi d. 742 AH – author of Tahdhib ul-Kamal & Tuhfatul-Ashraf, primary reference works for students of the six books of hadith.
  • Al-Zayla’i d. 762 AH – Author of Nasb ul-Rayah, a takhrij of hadith in the Hanafi text al-Hidayah. It is considered a true masterwork of takhrij, as attested to by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani himself.
  • Ibn ul-Mulaqqin d. 804 AH – Wrote massive works in Takhrij for works in the Shafi’I madhhab, some 20 volumes long like Al-Badr al-Munir. Has a long, near 30 volume commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari as well, as well as many other works.
  • Abul-Fadl al-Iraqi d. 806 AH – author of the famous Alfiyyah in the sciences of hadith and Tarh-ul-Tathrib, a celebrated commentary on hadith used by the Shafi’i madhhab.
  • Nur ul-Din Al-Haythami d. 807 AH – Author of Majma’ al-Zawa’id, a brilliant work bridging the six books of hadith with other collections.
  • Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani d. 852 AH – author of Fath-ul-Bari, the most famous commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari ever written.
  • Most of the commentators on the six books of hadith in general belong here.
  • Badr ul-Din al-A’yni d. 855 AH – Author of Umdatul-Qari, an enyclopedic commentary with Hanafi touches on Sahih al-Bukhari.
  • Al-Sakhawi d. 902 AH – Wrote a famous commentary on al-Iraqi’s Alfiyyah called Fath ul-Mughith.
  • Jalal ul-Din Al-Suyuti d. 911 AH – wrote massive works in the sciences of hadith & hadith books as well that became relied-upon and well-studied works after him.
  • Mulla Ali Qari d. 1014 AH – Wrote Mirqatul-Mafatih, one of the most famous & celebrated commentaries on hadith, as well as a commentary on the Muwatta & other works.
  • Al-Munawi d. 1031 AH – Wrote many important works in hadith.
  • Ibn Allan d. 1057 AH – prolific scholar of hadith who authored two famous commentaries, usually considered the most authoritative on al-Nawawi’s Riyadh al-Salihin & al-Adhkar.
  • Umar Al-Bayquni d. 1080 AH – The author of the well studied introductory poem in the sciences of hadith, al-Bayquniyyah.
  • Muhammad Al-Zabidi d. 1205 AH – Considered the Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani of his time.
  • Al-Laknawi d. 1304 AH – Author of al-Raf’ wal-Takmil and many other important works.
  • Any many, many others.

4.04 – Major Scholars of Fiqh who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs. Most of these are critical scholars in their madhabs & their works are relied upon for the official position of the madhhabs & for fatwa by scholars in the past and today.

From the Hanafis

  • Al-Sarakhsi d. 490 AH
  • Al-Bazdawi d. 493 AH
  • Al-Kasani d. 587 AH
  • Al-Marghinani d. 593 AH – author of al-Hidayah, used as the main study texts for Hanafis all over the Muslim world.
  • Abdul Aziz al-Bukhari d. 730 AH
  • Al-Zayla’i d. 762 AH
  • Al-Kamal ibn al-Humam d. 861 AH, author of al-Fath ul-Qadir, the more relied upon commentary on Al-Marghinani’s al-Hidayah.
  • Ibn Amir al-Haj d. 879 AH
  • Ibn Nujaym d. 970 AH
  • Al-Shurunbulali d. 1069 AH
  • Al-Haskafi d. 1088 AH
  • Al-Khadimi d. 1176 AH
  • Al-Tahtawi d. 1231 AH
  • Ibn Abidin d. 1252 AH, author of Radd ul-Muhtar, used for fatwa today.
  • Most of the Hanafi scholars of India & Pakistan

From the Malikis

  • Al-Baqillani d. 403 AH – Famous theologian of the Ash’ari madhhab
  • Ibn Rushd d. 520 AH
  • Ibn ul-Hajib d. 646 AH
  • Al-Qarafi d. 684 AH – Famous author of al-Furuq.
  • Ibn al-Hajj d. 737 AH
  • Ibn Juzayy d. 741 AH
  • Khalil ibn Ishaq d. 767 AH – Famous author of the Mukhtasar, studied by Malikis around the world as a primary text since.
  • Al-Shatibi d. 790 AH – Famous scholar of usul-ul-fiqh whose ideas have witnessed a resurgence in modern fiqh
  • Al-Sanusi d. 895 AH – Famous theologian of the Ash’ari madhhab
  • Ahmed Zarruq d. 899 AH
  • Al-Laqqani d. 1041 AH
  • Al-Zarqani d. 1122 AH
  • Al-Nafrawi d. 1126 AH
  • Ali Al-Adawi d. 1189 AH
  • Al-Dardir d. 1201 AH
  • Al-Dasuqi d. 1230 AH
  • Ulaysh d. 1299 AH
  • Most of the Maliki scholars of Mauritania, Morocco & North Africa in general.

From the Shafi’is

  • Al-Isfirayini d. 418 AH
  • Abul-Ma’ali Al-Juwayni d. 438 AH
  • Al-Shirazi d. 476 AH – Author of al-Muhadhhab, the most studied text in Shafi’i Fiqh until al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj
  • Imam ul-Haramayn al-Juwayni 478 AH – Famous theologian of the Ash’ari madhhab, but also the author of Nihayatul-Matlab, a critical enyclopedic work in fiqh which transformed the Shafi’i madhhab in fiqh.
  • Al-Mutawalli d. 478 AH
  • Al-Ghazzali d. 505 AH – Famous theologian of the Ash’ari madhhab, but also the author of numerous encyclopedic works in Shafi’i fiqh which were relied upon by all later scholars of Shafi’i fiqh. Also one of the most important figures in tasawwuf.
  • Abu al-Sa’d Al-Sam’ani d. 562 AH
  • Al-Razi d. ~604 AH – Famous theologian of the Ash’ari madhhab (see tafsir above also)
  • Al-Amidi d. 631 AH
  • Al-Rafi’i d. 632 AH – Author of al-Aziz, a critical enyclopedic work collecting all the views of the Shafi’i scholars of fiqh before it, condensed by al-Nawawi.
  • Al-Izz ibn Abdissalam d. 660 AH – Author of al-Qawa’id al-Kubra, together with al-Qarafi’s al-Furuq, is one of the most important & foundational works in Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah.
  • Al-Nawawi d. 676 AH – the 2nd Imam al-Shafi’i. All of Shafi’i fiqh after al-Nawawi revolves around his corrections and writings in the madhhab.
  • Al-Baydawi d. 685 AH – Wrote an important work in Usul-ul-Fiqh that has been studied since. Also an Ash’ari theologian.
  • Ibn Daqiq al-Eid d. 702 AH
  • Ibn Al-Rif’ah d. 710 AH – played a pivotal role in the formation of the later madhhab, wrote a massive 40 volume work in Shafi’i fiqh.
  • Taqiy-ul-Din al-Subki d. 756 AH
  • Ibn Naqib al-Misri d. 769 AH – Author of Umdatus-Salik, an intermediate text studied to this day by students of the Shafi’i madhhab across the world.
  • Taj ul-Din al-Subki d. 771 AH
  • Al-Isnawi d. 772 AH – Author of a critical commentary on Baydawi’s text in Usul-ul-Fiqh studied in al-Azhar to this day.
  • Al-Adhra’i d. 783 AH
  • Al-Hisni d. 829 AH
  • Ibn al-Muqri d. 837 AH
  • Al-Mahalli d. 864 AH – Author of a critical commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Ibn Qasim al-Ghazzi d. 918 AH – Author of al-Fath al-Qarib, a commentary on Ghayat ul-Ikhtisar, a beginner text in the Shafi’i madhhab studied all over the world to this day.
  • Zakariyyah al-Ansari d. 926 AH – Scholar and author of multiple subjects, when ‘Shaykh-ul-Islam’ is used in the Shafi’i madhhab it is used to mean him. Almost all the scholars in this list in the century after his passing were direct students of his or his students’ students.
  • Shihab ul-Din Al-Ramli d. 957 AH
  • Umayra d. 957 AH – Author of a critical sub-commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Ibn Hajr al-Haytami d. 974 AH – Author of a critical commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Al-Shirbini d. 977 AH – Author of a critical commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Ibn al-Qasim al-Abbadi d. 992 AH – Author of a critical sub-commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Shams ul-Din Al-Ramli d. 1004 AH – Author of a critical commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Al-Qalyubi d. 1069 AH – Author of a critical sub-commentary on al-Nawawi’s al-Minhaj, still relied upon for fatwa & studied today.
  • Al-Attar d. 1218 AH
  • Al-Bujayrami d. 1221 AH
  • Al-Dimyati d. 1278 AH
  • Most of the Shafi’i scholars of Egypt, Yemen, South India & South East Asia

And many, many others

4.05 – Scholars of History & Biographical works who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs (many are repeats from the section on Hadith):

  • Abu Nu’aym al-Asbahani d. 430 AH
  • Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi d. 463 AH
  • Al-Qadi Iyad d. 544 AH
  • Ibn Asakir d. 571 AH
  • Al-Suhayli d. 581 AH
  • Ibn al-Athir d. 630 AH
  • Ibn Khallikan d. 681 AH
  • Al-Muhibb al-Tabari d. 693 AH
  • Al-Mizzi d. 742 AH
  • Al-Safadi d. 764 AH
  • Ibn Khaldun d. 808 AH
  • Ibn Nasir al-Din d. 837 AH
  • Ibn Qadi Shuhbah d. 851 AH
  • Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani d. 852 AH
  • Al-Suyuti d. 911 AH
  • Al-Qastalani d. 923 AH
  • Al-Salihi d. 942 AH
  • Al-Tilmisani d. 1041 AH
  • And many, many others

4.06 – Scholars of the Arabic Language who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs:

  • Al-Zabidi d. 379 AH
  • Ibn Faris d. 395 AH – Author of Mu’jam Maqayis al-Lugha, a very useful & important dictionary that extracts the meanings of words based on their morphology.
  • Al-Jurjani d. 471 AH – Author of Dal’ail ul-I’jaz & Asrar ul-Balaghah, two of the most foundational and important works in both Arabic rhetoric & Qur’anic eloquence ever written.
  • Abul-Barakat al-Anbari d. 577 AH – Author of al-Insaf fi Masa’il al-Khilaf, a critical work that catalogues the differences between the Basran & Kufan madhhabs in Arabic grammar.
  • Ibn al-Athir d. 606 AH – not the historian mentioned above. This one wrote a dictionary for obscure words found in hadith.
  • Al-Hamawi d. 626 AH – Poet & famous author of Mu’jam ul-Buldan, a massive work geography that is a critical reference today.
  • Ibn ul-Hajib d. 646 AH – mentioned above among Maliki scholars. Besides his well-studied & important works in Usul-ul-Fiqh, Ibn ul-Hajib wrote some of the most important study handbooks in the Arabic language which are studied by advanced students to this day.
  • Ibn Malik d. 672 AH – author of the Alfiyyah, a 1000-line poem in Arabic grammar that is studied by all intermediate & advanced students of the Islamic sciences to this day.
  • Ibn Mandhur d. 711 AH – author of Lisan ul-Arab, one of the largest & most authoritative dictionaries in the Arabic language every written.
  • Ibn Ajrum d. 723 – Author of the introductory grammar text al-Ajrumiyyah, studied all over the Muslim world. If you haven’t heard of it, cry.
  • Al-Qazwini d. 739 AH – author of a famous work in Arabic rhetoric studied widely today.
  • Abu Hayyan d. 745 AH – mentioned above in tafsir.
  • Ibn Hisham al-Ansari d. 761 AH – the master of Arabic grammar of his time, his books for intermediate students are studied all over the Muslim world to this day. His advanced books are studied by specalists all over the Muslim world.
  • Ibn Aqil d. 769 AH – author of the famous commentary of Ibn Malik’s Alfiyyah which is studied worldwide to this day.
  • Sa’d ul-Din al-Taftazani d. 792 AH – may Allah forgive Sh. Abdul Fattah for forgetting about him in this list. One of the masters of the Arabic language, whose works in Arabic rhetoric & grammar are indispensable for advanced students of the Islamic sciences. Also a Maturidi theologian and author of important works in usul-ul-fiqh.
  • Al-Fayruzabadi d. ~816 AH – author of al-Qamus al-Muhit, another of the most authoritative dictionaries in the Arabic language, as well as many other works in the Arabic sciences.
  • Al-Ahdal d. 855 AH
  • Al-Hattab d. 902 AH – Author of Mutammimmah al-Ajrumiyyah, an intermediate text in Arabic grammar, as well as works in Maliki fiqh.
  • Khalid al-Azhari d. 905 AH – author of many important & famous study handbooks studied to this day, especially a grammatical analysis of Ibn Malik’s Alfiyyah.
  • Al-Suyuti d. 911 AH – why does Al-Suyuti’s name keep coming up? Because he wrote around 600 books in his short life of 62 years. He wrote excellent works in Arabic grammar that are important for specialists to this day.
  • And many, many others

4.07 – Famous political leaders of the Muslim world who belonged to the Ash’ari or Maturidi Madhhabs:

  • Nur ul-Din al-Zinki d. 569 AH – The ruler who set the stage for Salahuddin al-Ayyubi’s eventual liberation of Jerusalem.
  • Salahuddin al-Ayyubi d. 589 AH – Needs no introduction. Was an ardent student of the Arabic language & Islamic sciences before he became a general.
  • Al-Mudhaffar Qutz d. 658 AH – leader of the Mamluk army that stopped the Mongols at Ain Jalut
  • Al-Dhahir Bibris d. 676 AH – 4th Sultan of the Mamluks & true founder of the Empire. Won many battles against the Crusaders & Mongols.
  • Nizam-ul-Mulk d. 485 AH – Seljuk vizier known for his connection with al-Ghazzali, helped to ensure that Ash’ari philosophical theology became the standard in Islamic seminaries in the Seljuk empire.
  • Muhammad al-Fatih d. 886 AH – Conquerer of Constantinople and true founder of the Ottoman Empire. Was well learned in the Islamic sciences, and besides his political accomplishments, commissioned a research project into the works of al-Ghazzali by the scholars of his empire.
  • Most Abbasid, Mamluk & Ottoman rulers were Ash’aris or Maturidis.
  • Many of the Muslim leaders or scholars who fought against colonizers.
  • Many of the founders or members of current Muslim political movements such as the Ikhwan in Egypt & AKP in Turkey.

Examples of Ta’wil (Reinterpeting) in Allah’s Attributes from the Salaf

As a supplement to the last section, this section is to show that the figurative reinterpreting (i.e. ta’wil) of Allah’s attributes by the Ash’ari & Maturidi madhhabs was not without precedent in the salaf. This list was compiled by Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i.

5.01 – Ibn Abbas RAD interpreting the ‘saq’ or ‘shin’ of Allah figuratively as Shiddah or severity. Mentioned in the tafsir of Abu Hatim & al-Tabari.

5.02 – Ibrahim al-Nakha’i, Qatadah, Mujahid, Ibn Jubayr, al-Dahhak all intepreting the ‘saq’ of Allah figuratively as severity. Mentioned in the tafsir of al-Tabari, and some in the Musannaf of Abdul-Razzaq.

5.03 – Ibn Abbas RAD & Al-Dahhak interpreting the ‘coming’ of Allah figuratively as the ‘coming of His command’. Mentioned by al-Qurtubi in his tafsir.

5.04 – Ibn Abbas RAD & others from the salaf interpreting the ‘Kursi’ or footstool of Allah as His knowledge. Mentioned by Abu Hatim in his tafsir.

5.05 – Ibn Abbas RAD & others from the salaf interpreting the ‘hands’ of Allah as his power. Mentioned in the tafsir of al-Tabari.

5.06 – Ahmad ibn Hanbal interpreting the ‘coming’ of Allah figuratively as the ‘coming of His decree’. Mentioned in al-Bayhaqi’s biography of him, and in Ibn Kathir’s al-Bidayah wal-Nihayah.

5.07 – Al-Bukhari & al-Dahhak interpreting the ‘laughter’ of Allah figuratively as His mercy. Mentioned in Al-Bayhaqi’s al-Asma’ wal-Sifat.

5.08 – Al-Hasan al-Basri & al-Nadr ibn al-Shumayl intepreting the ‘foot’ of Allah figuratively as ‘those who preceded in history’. Mentioned by al-Bayhaqi in al-Asma’ wal-Sifat and Ibn al-Jawzi in Daf’ Shubah il-Tashbih.

5.09 – Al-Tabari interpreting the Istiwa or ‘ascencion’ of Allah figuratively has the ‘ascencison of His authority’, mentioned in his tafsir.

5.10 – Ibn Hibban interpreting the ‘foot’ of Allah figuratively as ‘a place’. Mentioned in his Sahih.

5.11 – Imam Malik ibn Anas* & Yahya ibn Bukayr interpreting Allah’s ‘nuzul’ or descending figuratively as the ‘descending of His rule’. Mentioned by al-Dhahabi in Siyar A’lam al-Nubala.

5.12 – Al-Hasan al-Basri interpreting the ‘coming’ of Allah figuratively as the ‘coming of His command and predestined decree’, and al-Kalbi interpeting it figuratively as ‘the descent of Allah’s rule’. Mentioned by al-Baghawi in his tafsir.

5.13 – Al-A’mash & Al-Tirmidhi interpeting the ‘jogging’ of Allah figuratively as His ‘forgiveness & mercy’. Mentioned by al-Tirmidhi in his Sunan.

5.14 – Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak interpreting the ‘kanaf’ or chest as His ‘covering’. Mentioned by al-Bukhari in Khalqu-Af’al il-Ibad.

For volume & page numbers see Sh. Abdul-Fattah al-Yafi’i’s book al-Manhajiyyah al-A’amah, pg 48. He has also written a separate book containing even more examples, called Al-Tajsim wal-Mujassimah wa Haqiqatu Aqidati al-Salafi fil-Sifat il-Ilayhiyyah. Both can be found easily on the internet with a Google Search.

An Important Note on Ibn Taymiyyah & Sufi Theology

As a final note, it is important to highlight the elephants in the room,
which is Ibn Taymiyyah’s views on Allah’s attributes, and Sufi theology.

6.01 – Ibn Taymiyyah, as is famously known by those familiar with these controversies, was known for his ithbat or affirmation of the outward meanings of Allah’s attributes. So for example, he said of Allah’s ‘hands’ that Allah swt actually has real hands that have the attributes of hands like grasping, gripping etc, however their modality is unknowable to us. Qadi Abu Ya’la expressed similar views.

In my humble view, I believe this to view to be logically contradictory & also theologically risky. I do not believe it to be correct, and I am unable to rationalize a defense for Ibn Taymiyyah’s view on Ithbat.

However… I dont believe Ibn Taymiyyah is to be excluded from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah. Why?

Recall the beginning of this article where I discussed Two Tier Orthodoxy. In the second tier we discussed the importance of scholars approving of an issue as ikhtilaf.

The Hanbali madhhab considers Ibn Taymiyyah to have been Sheikh-ul-Islam, and a Mujtahid in the madhhab. This can be found in relied-upon works of fatwa in the Hanbali madhhab. It may be the case that non-Hanbalis (such as myself) vehemently disagree with Ibn Taymiyyah’s views, or find them uncomfortable, but we cannot deny historical fact that Ibn Taymiyyah’s place in the Hanbali madhhabs is canon. And Allah knows best.

6.02 – It is a gross mistake of extremist Ash’aris, some of them scholars who I respect for their academic output, who go far beyond acceptable limits in speaking about Sheikh ul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on Him. He did not commit the heresy of tajsim i.e. make Allah into a 3-dimensional being – although I cannot deny that he came dangerously close to doing it.

Ibn Taymiyyah said in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa, “The extent that a person may mention [from the Qur’an] is, ‘Say: Allah is One’, His [Allah’s] statement, ‘Nothing is similar to His resemblance’, and His statement, ‘Do you know any other bearing His name?’. These verses explicitly indicate the negation of tajsim (assigning 3 dimensional attributes to Allah) and tashbih (resembling Allah with His creation). As for the negation of the hand that befits His majesty, then there is nothing in this speech to indicate this at all.”

He also said in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa, “Ahlus-Sunnah do not differ that there is nothing that is similar to Allah’s the Exalted’s resemblance, not in His essence, His attributes or His actions. More so most of Ahlus-Sunnah from our Ashab (i.e. from the Hanbalis) and others excommunicate those who do tashbih & tajsim from Islam.” He also said in Majmu’ ul-Fatawa, “If someone claims that Allah does not have a hand from the hands typical of Creation, and that His hand is not a limb then this is true. But if he claims that He does not have a hand as an attribute additional to the seven attributes (i.e. the essential ones that Ash’aris affirm) then this is false.”

It is definitively clear that Ibn Taymiyyah, despite his ithbat, still negated tashbih & tajsim. It is a slur & slander against him to accuse him of that. And Allah knows best.

6.03 – As for the issue of whether the way of the salaf was of ithbat or
tafwidh, it was not my aim to address this in this article. I may write
something separate on that, however I am not passionate about this
topic, and in all honesty although I do hold the view that tafwidh was
more likely the way of the salaf, I don’t think the salaf even thought of
differentiating between the two in the first place. In fact as we saw in
the last section, some of the salaf may have done ta’wil. Tafwidh seems
more appropriate to me because it seems – from my readings – like the
salaf generally didn’t like such questions and didn’t like thinking
about these things. And this to me is the true way of the salaf.
Arguing about it immediately destroys the spirit of the attitudes of
the salaf on this issues.

6.04 – As for Sufi theology, I have spent the past two years reading
quite a few books on the subject, and because of how massive the
subject is, I still have quite a few readings left before I feel comfortable
reaching a decisive conclusion. I will mention some preliminary
thoughts on the subject here though:

Firstly, the accusation of hulul (i.e. that God exists within Creation)
against Sufi theology seems to be false. One of the problems with
Ibn Arabi’s writings is the obscurity of his writings and the difficulty of
determining what exactly he meant in passages. Coincidentally is also a
problem in Ibn Taymiyyah’s writings, as I explained in my article about
him, although to a lesser degree, as Ibn Arabi’s writings are filled with
spiritual imagery & figurative speech. However, it is clear that the
scholars who followed Ibn Arabi’s thought & were students of his like
al-Qunawi & al-Qaysari made it explicitly clear that Ibn Arabi did not
intend hulul.

Secondly, Sufi theology can be utterly compelling & beautiful at
times. It is not a stretch to say that Sufi theology makes extensive use
of the Qur’an & Sunnah, and sometimes in very powerful ways that
correspond startlingly well with the apparent meanings of sacred text. I
do not hesistate to say that the purest & most absolute expression of
tawhid in Islamic theology can be found in Sufi theology, although its
existentialist conclusion may leave some uncomfortable. Unlike Kalam,
Sufi theology is best understood with the heart instead of the mind,
similar to how Athari theology is best understood with the apparent
meanings of sacred text rather than the mind. And perhaps this is the
way to reconcile between the three.

Thirdly, Sufi theology is not without its very controversial &
problematic views. Ibnul-Arabi’s writings have many spiritual
anecdotes and reflections on Qur’anic verses that can sometimes seem
like outright kufr. However many scholars have excused him, arguing
that his expressions must be interpreted figuratively, as they were
expressions of spiritual elation rather than philosophical language
meant to be taken literally. In some cases this is easy to do, however in
others it is not. Sufi theology also does dangerously come close to the
same tashbih & tajsim that Ibn Taymiyyah was accused of, although,
like Ibn Taymiyyah, there are also many statements by Ibnul-Arabi &
other Sufi theologians that deter us from thinking they actually believed
in tajsim & tashbih.

Fourthly, recall the statements mentioned by al-Subki and al-
Zabidi, which included Sufi theology within Ahlus-Sunnah wal-
Jama’ah. I cannot endorse including or excluding Sufi theologians like
Ibnul-Arabi, Al-Qunawi & al-Qaysari from Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah at
this moment, because of my lack of knowledge. It is often argued that
the righteousness & piety of Sufi theologians is sufficient to argue for
the soundness of their theological views. However this was also true of
some of the Mu’tazilah. Some were known for their zuhd & tasawwuf
and this does not mean we approve of their theology. However it may
be reasonable to say that like the Mu’tazilah, Sufi theologians were
close to Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah and not as bad as other heterodox
groups. And Allah knows best. May Allah forgive the righteous &
sincere for all their shortcomings, deceased or alive.

Lastly, it is important to differentiate between Sufis & Sufi theology. Not all Sufis, especially those preceding Ibnul-Arabi, followed Sufi theology. Tasawwuf & Sufism is not equivalent to Ibnul-Arabi & followers of his theology. There are many examples from the time of the salaf, until the Hanbali, Ash’ari & Maturidi theologians & scholars who were Sufis or associated with Sufism, but did not have the beliefs of Sufi theologians. However this is not the place for this discussion. I have a 100+ slide introduction to the topic of Sufism & its history and I cannot do justice to the topic in an endnote here.

Concluding Thoughts

For the past few months, I have seen two obscenely different worlds on social media. One is the horrific imagery coming from Palestine of o brothers & sisters being bombed, starved & tortured to death. The other is the continuation of horrendously stupid debates on bid’ah and kalam. This parallel does not just make me angry, it makes me disgusted.

I want to make sure I am extremely clear here. The reason I wrote this & my previous bid’ah article are to help unite the ummah.

When you study Islam to a reasonably high level, you will realize that there are so many things you can choose to fight your fellow Muslim about. There are so many opportunities to take what you learn and use it to start a war with your brother or sister in Islam. This is a Satanic trait.

Why do we not study, teach & write about Islam to bring unity, yet distinguish truth from falsehood in a way that is not just to feed our ego or burn off excess testosterone but to bring the vast majority of Muslims together?

Knowledge comes with responsibility. Will we use knowledge to heal, support and raise the ummah? Or will we use it to deepen the dark hole it has fallen into and drive it further into despair?

The choice is yours, my dear reader.

Leave a Reply

Trending