defending a belief one does not hold

Discussion in 'Bickering' started by AbdalQadir, May 12, 2010.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    we should defend ie acknowledge and respect the difference of opinion of FUROO' while just stating that we believe our opinion is asahh (righter). this is the way of the Ahlus Sunnah.

    but on matters of 'AQAID and USUL firstly there is no difference of opinion within AHLUS SUNNAH. the one that is on secondary matters WITHIN AHLUS SUNNAH should be respected and acknowledged too, like the example of abu talib you gave or some detailed semantical points between Ash'aris and Maturidis.

    defending/respecting/acknowledging differences on USUL and 'AQAID just means the person is a politician, nothing more. a name like tahirul qadri comes to mind.
     
  2. Assalaamu 'Alaykum

    AGREED . Brother.. But I am not asking that one needs to validate it. If a suppose a Hanafi Aalim is explaining any issue, he will do so in accordance with Hanafi Madhab, validating the postion of the Ahnaaf, but simply just saying that -"We the Ahnaaf believe so and so., but according to Hanbalis, or Malikis, or Shaafees this is so and so." Simple. He is just quoting the position of the Hanbalis etc. that is it.

    Validating some point is one thing and quoting that the point which is contradictory to ours and still can be considered, is another.

    I hope you get my point Bhaijaan ..

    ALLAH HAAFIZ
     
  3. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    MHR: i don't contend what you write but the issue is: why would i expend all my energy validating the hanbali position?
     
  4. Assalaamu 'Alaykum

    Brother Aqdas i agree with you.. But look at the second part of your post. In reference to it i would like to say something..

    Now if there is a position over which the Ahnaaf agree upon and according to the Hanbalis it is completely different. Then if an Aalim, is consulted over the ruling, he will say that according to Hazrat Imaam-e-A'azam Abu Hanifah Raziallahu Ta'alah 'Anhu, it is so and so .. but according to Hazrat Imaam Hanbal Raziallahu Ta'alah 'Anhu it is different so and so.. And he says that both are correct accordingly to the Madhab he belongs to Then I bellieve there is no harm.

    Now taking a different issue.. on Yazeed .. and Ismail dehelvi .. The positions are variable

    ALLAH HAAFIZ
     
  5. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    i mean, i wouldn't appear on tv and have a dedicated programme to validate a belief opposite to my own. it just doesn't make sense.

    there are many examples that can be given but another one to make it clear: the majority believe the father of ibrahim 'alaihis salam was tarikh, not azar. a certain scholar claims to be with the majority but does not consider the minority misguided either. however, he then spends years propogating [and mentions it in most of his speeches whether they are to do with this issue or not] that believing that azar was ibrahim's father is fine. he is even writing a voluminous book on the issue that azar was indeed ibrahim's father and has gathered numerous works to quote from.

    why is he doing this if he does not believe azar is ibrahim's father?

    ---
    the issue in contention is one of 'aqida but here is a fiqh example to further clarify:

    qir'at khalf al-imam for hanafis is makruh tahrimi but i believe it is allowed in other madh'habs.

    as a hanafi, why would i spend years presenting the proofs for the other madh'habs positions? why would i go to the extent to disprove my own belief.

    weird...
     
  6. Research : The modern Look

    What I think is that many matters of Aqidah or other major Islamic issues, which arise, like the question about Janaab Abu Talib dying a Muslim or not, it can be found in the Scholarly works of Ulama-e-Karaam of the past, and research on this topic, I think, is just going through these works and and telling the common people about it in simpler form. And that sounds, a bit strange as such works have come out in many forms, and many people know about it..

    The IRF, is trying hard to 'research'.. they might be doing good too, in non-Aqidah matters, like presenting the Peaceful Face of Islam to the World, but when it comes to matter of Aqaid, they fail, as Zakir Naik, presents those facts that are fabricated ones (especially fabricated from the Ahl-e-Haith point of view)..

    The Best researcher of Our Times is none other than Huzoor A'ala Hazrat Rahmatullah 'Alayh, who I think has presented enough solutions to almost every aspect of Islamic life, that a person just needs to browse through his works to find a solution to any Fiqhi or Aqaid related or almost any query realted to Islam ..

    ALLAH HAAFIZ
     
  7. faqir

    faqir Veteran

    most of the 'research' done these days seems to me to be just digging out older scholar's research on an already researched to death topic.

    i wish there would be more research on contemporary issues of importance
     
  8. well sidi aqdas put two and two together...:); i have no idea what or who you´re referring too but if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck...one can assume it is a duck! i think the salient word is "claims".
     
  9. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    i am watching a sky channel as i type and wondering why a scholar spends so much time, effort and energy researching and defending a belief that he himself claims not to hold...

    i have given this example before: i believe that abu talib did not demise as a muslim but acknowledge that some scholars believe the opposite. since it is my belief that he demised a kafir, i will not spend years researching and defending the belief that i don't hold.

    do you find it strange too?
     

Share This Page