The Albaani Site

Translation from the Works of the Reviver of this Century

A Discussion concerning the Difference of the Companions in Creed [Aqidah] | 1

باب الكلام حول خلاف الصحابة في العقيدة

Chapter Being a Discussion of the Difference of the Companions in the Islamic Creed [Aqidah]

Questioner: In the Name of Allaah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful. [All] praise is [due] to Allaah, Lord of the worlds and may the peace and praise of Allaah be upon the Messenger of Allaah.

As for what follows:

The questioner says, ‘Noble Shaikh! You claim that creed is a matter which the Righteous Predecessors were united upon, yet along with that we find that there is difference between them in affirming an Eye or two Eyes.

Al-Albaani: Firstly, [what did you say], ‘You …’ what?

Questioner: You claim.

Al-Albaani: Claim, ok. Would that he worded it slightly more softly.

Questioner: … that creed is a matter which the Salaf were united upon yet along with that we find that there is a difference [of opinion] amongst them in affirming an Eye, or two Eyes, and the Shin. For it has been reported from Ibn Abbaas, may Allaah be pleased with them both, that he interpreted the Saying of Allaah the Most High, “The Day when the Shin shall be laid bare.” [Al-Qalam 68:42] to mean hardship and the suffering [of that Day].

The same is said about the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم seeing his Lord, the Majestic and Most High. Whoever affirms it then it is obligatory upon him to believe that, and whoever negates it then it is obligatory upon him to believe that which the negation means.

So what should our stance be, may Allaah reward you with good?

Al-Albaani: It was befitting that the question [be posed] without this warning, since I don’t think the questioner was relating my opinion and [thus] building the direction of his question upon that. That is because we are the ones who hold it to be religion that there is no difference between what is called usool and between what … [part of the recording is lost here]

… that they should be in agreement and united when they are able to. As for when it is possible that that may not be the case in the usool let alone the furoo [subsidiary issues] then the affair goes back to the mujtahid: if he had striven to come to the Truth and was correct he has two rewards, and if he made a mistake then he has one. As we said there is no difference in that between the usool and the furoo.

As for the claim that there is unity in all of the usool in contrast to the subsidiary issues [furoo] then I do not believe that this is something which a scholar would say with absolute certainty.

The most we can say is that the Salaf agreed that the foundation regarding the Attributes of Allaah which occur in the Book or the Sunnah is that they be taken as they are without any ta’weel–this is what it is possible to say they were united upon … but this does not negate the fact that some difference can occur in some of the issues connected to this methodology.

And it is true that difference occurred concerning the example which the questioner mentioned regarding the interpretation of the Shin.

But is there difference amongst these [people from the Salaf] who may have differed in some of those parts connected to creed or tawheed, is there difference amongst them in the principle foundation [al-asl] of the rule?  The answer is no.

And this is the difference between the followers of the Salaf and the followers of those who came later [the Khalaf]. For this is the rule with the Salaf, i.e., to believe in everything that has been reported from Allaah and His Prophet without making ta’weel and without ta’teel.

As for the Khalaf, then the rule with them is ta’weel which is not submission/or the rule with them is not submission.

Click forherethe second part.


PDF of Al-Albaani’s lecture on Hizbut-Tahrir

Al-Albaani on Hizb al-Tahrir

And here is the video a brother made of all the posts, jazaahullaahu khairaa:

%d bloggers like this: