The Role of Khabr Ahaad And the Aqeedah

[Islamic Revival]

The 'Aqeedah is the fundamental belief that the human being holds regarding man, life, and the universe around him. It serves as the foundation for his thoughts about this life and the basis for his actions. It is the basis for building the personality of the human being. As a result, any matter related to the 'Aqeedah is of utmost importance. After the early generations of Muslims for whom the 'Aqeedah was clear and pure, many false ideas crept into the mindset of later Muslims, some of which are related to the 'Aqeedah. Exposing the falsehood that these ideas are based upon and eliminating them from our thinking is a critical step in preserving the Islamic belief. Amongst the major issues in which there has arisen confusion is that of Khabr ahaad (Hadeeth reported by a single chain of narrators) and its use as a daleel in the matters of 'Aqeedah. This issue itself is not new as previous scholars from even the very early generations discussed it. It is also a fundamental issue discussed in all the books of 'Usul. Any person who is familiar with 'Usul ul Fiqh realizes this fact. As an example, even an elementary school book in Usul ul-Fiqh from the Secondary Institute of the Islamic University in Madinah entitled, Tas-heel Al-'Usul Ila Fahmi 'Ilm il 'Usul (Paving the Way Toward Understanding the Science of 'Usul), written by 'Abdul Muhsin bin a1 'Abbad states, "...There were differences regarding Akhbaar ul Ahaad.. Some scholars said that it does not imply certainty (ilm), neither by itself nor with other supports, and that it implies nothing but doubt (Thunn). Others said that originally speaking, Khabr ul- Wahid implies doubt, but it may imply certainty with additional supports"





In spite of the fundamental nature of this issue and they general agreement of previous scholars that Khabr ahaad does not establish certainty, some Muslims started claiming that there was never any debate regarding Khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah, and that it is the ijma (consensus) of the scholars that it has to be taken in matters related to the 'Aqeedah. Rather than simply dismiss their claim, it is important for the Muslim to comprehend the nature of this claim and the basis on which it is false. Thus, we present here a critical study of the issue of adopting Khabr Ahaad in the Aqeedah.



Aspects of Islam



It is well known and accepted by all Muslims that the basic sources of Islam are the Qur'an and Sunnah. A detailed study of these texts reveals two main issues:



I) Issues related to the 'Aqeedah or Iman, such as believing in the Day of Judgment, the existence of angels, the finality of the prophethood of Muhammad (saaw) etc.


II) Issues related to actions ('Amaal), such as prayer, fasting, jihad, marriage, etc.



The distinction between these two aspects is very apparent when one surveys the ayat of the Qur'an as well as the Ahadeeth. As an example, Allah (swt) informed us of the miraculous birth of 'Isa (as), about his speaking while still in the crib, and other miracles that were bestowed upon him. The verses expounding these ideas do not carry any order for action. However, believing in these ayat is obligatory. These ayat establish some basic concepts in our Iman, such as the fact that 'Isa (as) was a messenger from Allah, that he was supported by miracles, and that his people rejected him. Similarly, Allah (swt) told us about the people of the cave in Surah A1 Kahf, about the struggle of Ibrahim (as) with his tribe, and about the creation of Adam (as). All of these are issues related to the Iman exclusively. Anyone who does not believe in these ideas is considered to be Kafir. In contrast, there are other texts that are related to the actions. As an example, Allah (swt) says, "And establish the prayer, and give the Zakaf" [TMQ, Al-Baqarah 2: 1 101, and , "Do not come near Zina (adultery or fornicafion)" [TMQ, Al-Isra7 17:321, and judge between them by that which Allah has sent down" [TMQ, Al-Ma7idah 5:48] All of these ayat pertain to actions which Allah (swt) either obliged or forbade us to perform. They do not carry issues related to the 'Aqeedah, though denying them or the rule in them is considered kufr because it amounts to a denial of the Qur'an.


However, not complyiq with the rules does not take one out of Islam. Rather, it makes one a sinner who could be punished or forgiven by Allah (swt). Thus, there is a clear distinction, even in the text, between the issues of 'Aqeedah and the issues related to our 'amaal. This is not a hypothetical distinction, for it has great practical relevance. As demonstrated earlier, the rules related to the 'Aqeedah are clearIy different from those related to the 'amaal. Denying any issue of the 'Aqeedah leads one to be an apostate, who is executed by the State if he or she does not repent. However, if one repents, then there is no penalty. On the other hand, if one either leaves the obligations or commits the haram, he is not necessarily executed, Rather, he is given the punishment appropriat for the crime, i.e. 100 lashes for fornication, 80 lashes for false witnessing against a woman's imprisonment, etc. In addition, repentance is the issue of 'amaal does not prevent the legal punish life from being applied. Even in the cases where some crimes are punishable by death, the person is considered to have died as a Muslim, as opposed to the apostate, who is considered Kafir.



This distinction is also important on the day of judgment. On the Day of Judgment, Allah (swt) will not look to the deeds of anyone who does not have the Islamic 'Aqeedah. Their deeds will be like a mirage, as Allah (swt) describe in Surah Nur. This is applicable only to those people who are not Muslims or did not believe in any issues of 'Aqeedah. However, those who were Muslims but committed sins, they may or may not be punished by Allah (swt) for the sins they committed, however, they will eventually enter A1 Jannah.



Consequently, it should be clear that Islam consists of two distinct, yet related, aspects, the 'Aqeedah and the 'Amaal (actions). They are distinct in that they carry different weight in this life and on the Day of Judgment They are related by virtue of the fact that the 'amaal must be based on the 'Aqeedah. Abstaining from pork because it is not healthy carries no weight on the Day of Judgment, but not eating pork because Allah (swt) forbade it does. In addition, the 'amaal serve as a witness to whether or not we truly believe in the Islamic 'Aqeedah. As an example, if one claimed to believe in Islam, but did not pray, fast, or give Zakat, how sincere could he be in his claim?



Having established the distinction between the 'Aqeedah and the 'Amaal, the question which arises is whether or not there is a difference in the method for adopting ideas related to each. For this, we need to first establish some background, from a legal perspective, about the Aqeedah, Ahkam Shar'iah, the nature of their relationship, and the sources for these.



Definition of A1 'Aqeedah



Al 'Aqeedah is an Arabic word derived from the word 'aqada, which linguistically means, "to tie things together in a very strong way." Some people claim that the term 'Aqeedah is not a Quranic term and that it was not used in the days of the Prophet (saaw). Though the same word is not used in the Qur'an, 'Uqood, which is a derivative word from the root verb 'aqada,is used in the Qur'an. Allah (swt) says, in Surah A1 Maidah, "0 you who believe, fulfill your 'Uqood (contracts)" [TMQ, Al-Ma'idah 5: 11]



The word 'Uqood (plural of 'Aqd) means a contract between two people which connects them in their transaction. Similarly, the 'Aqeedah ties and connects things together. Its usage as an Islamic term was not objected to by any scholar of repute, including Imam Shaf'i, Imam Abu Haneefah, and Ibn Taymiyyah. That is because the metaphorical definition of Al 'Aqeedah is "that which the heart is tied to." Thus, as a legal term, the word 'Aqeedah is well accepted to mean, the ideas which an individual adopts upon firm and resolute conviction in them based upon a conclusive daleel. There is no English word that can give this equivalent meaning. 'Aqeedah cannot be satisfactorily translated to 'belief, because the word 'belief gives no indication as to the level of certainty in that belief. It merely gives the connotation of acceptance with or without proof.



In addition to the absolute conviction in a particular idea, a Muslim is allowed to adopt other ideas that were proven without the definitive proof. These ideas, however, cannot be considered to be part of the 'Aqeedah or Iman. Rather, one would consider himself to have tasdiq in them. Tasdiq is to accept information to be true, but without establishing it as definitively true or constituting part of the 'Aqeedah. Thus, there are two levels, Tasdiq and Iman. The Iman is the 'Aqeedah and is sometimes referred to as Tasdiq Jazim (concrete and decisive belief).



Definition of Hukm Shari'



The definition of Hukm Shari is "The address of the Legislator that is related to the actions of the people." [Irshad ul Fuhool by Imam Shawkani, pg. 61. Simply from the definition, it is clear that the Hukm Shari' distinct from the 'Aqeedah, since the 'Aqeedah does not deal with our actions. Rather, it deals with our belief and thinking. Similarly, the Fiqh is defined as "Having the knowledge of the practical Divine Rules (a1 Masaia1 'Amaaliyyah) which are derived from their detailed evidences." The word A1 'Amaaliyyah is appended to the term in order to emphasize that fact that the Hukm is related to our 'Amaal, i.e. to our actions. In other words anything that is not related to peoples' actions is not considered as part of the Fiqh. Consequently, those ayat that deal with our actions are called Ayat ul Ahkam. That is why we see scholars such as Imam Shaf'i, Abu Bakr ibn A1 'Arabi, A1 Qurtubi, and A1 Jassaas, writing books which exclusively are tafseer for these ayat, even entitling their books, Tafseer Ahkam ul Qur'an.



Though the 'Aqeedah and the Hukm Shari' have been established as two different types of ideas, it does not necessarily mean that there is no relationship between them. Rather, understanding the nature of this relationship is essential to understanding Islam in a comprehensive and structured manner. The 'Aqeeda and the Hukm Shari' are related in two ways,



The Ahkam Shar'iah are derived from the islamic 'Aqeedah. The significance of this relationship is that it does not permit the Muslim to adopt rules related to his actions that are not connected to his belief in Allah as the Legislator. This connection between the ahkam and the 'Aqeedah is made based on the daleel by which the rule is established. Consequently, if there is no ayah or Hadeeth to support a specific rule, then that rule has to be rejected. If there were no relationship between the ahkam and the 'Aqeedah, then one would see no problem in adopting a rule without a daleel. However, since the two are connected, no Hukm can be considered Islamic without a daleel, and any Hukm not based on the daleel from Qur'an or Sunnah is not considered Islamic.


The personality of the human being is such that the 'Aqeedah that he adopts will orient him towards performing a specific actions in his life. It is incorrect to assume that one's ideas have no impact on one's behavior. As an example, if an individual considers a certain food as foul tasting, then it will be expected that he will try to avoid eating that food, assuming there are no other issues related to this action. His behavior towards that food is shaped by the idea that he carries about it. Similarly, the ideas that individuals carry about the nature of this life will be the primary determinants of an individual's way of life. This is the nature of the second type of relationship between the 'Aqeedah and the Hukm Shari'. The 'Aqeedah will produce the motivation for the individual to abide by the Hukm Shari' because it informs him that in doing so, he will receive a reward from his Creator and thereby avert His punishment. Perceiving the Hukm Shari' as divorced from the 'Aqecdah will not produce the desired impact in the life. It is the 'Aqeedah that establishes all other rules and ideas in a productive manner and creates consistency amongst them. From this understanding of the nature of the 'Aqeedah and the Hukm Shari', it becomes evident that it is equally damaging to assume that the 'Aqeedah and the Hukm Shari are the same or to think that there is no link between them. Rather, the correct approach is to recognize the difference, particularly because of its practical necessity, and to comprehend and maintain the relationship between them so as not to undermine the entire message of Islam.



Establishing the Belief in the Islamic Aqeedah



'Aqeedah, In addition to the difference in the nature of the 'Aqeeda and the Hukm Shari', there is a difference in the means by which issues related to the 'Aqeedah or ahkam are arrived at. Regarding the 'Aqeedah, many daleels establish the fact that it must be built on absolute certainty, whereas the ahkam can be adopted based on what is most likely to be true [Ghalabat ut Thunn).



Allah (swt) says, "lndeed, in the Creation of the Heaven and Earth and the alternation of day and night, there are signs for people with deep intellect." [TMQ, Al-'Imran 3: 1901 ]



As is clear from this ayah, the Iman is built through a process of thinking based on what one perceives of the reality. A person who goes through this process without preconceived notions as to the conclusions he wishes to reach will come to the realization that this universe and everything in it, due to their limited and dependent nature, are created. Consequently, there exists a Creator for man, life, and the universe. By continuing on this rational track of thinking, the human being will reach other conclusive ideas such as the belief in Prophethood and the Qur'an as being from Allah. Thus, the intellect mixed with the fitrah (man's nature) is the means by which ideas constituting the 'Aqeedah can be established. In addition to directing us to use the intellect to establish the 'Aqeedah, Allah (swt) also warned us from adopting ideas that do not have certainty. This includes ideas taken by imitation, emotion, reaction, and blind faith.



Allah (swt) says, "and most of them follow nothing but doubt and conjecture. Indeed, the doubt is of no avail to certified truth at all." [TMQ, Yunus 10:36]



"If you were to follow a lot of those on Earth, they would misguide you from Allah's path. They follow nothing but thunn [doubt and conjecture], and they do nothing but lie."[TMQ, Al-An'nam 6: 1161 ]



'They follow nothing but thunn and what their nafs desires. Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Rabb" [TMQ, An-Najm 53: 23 ]



'Do you have 'ilm for that such that you can present if to us. You follow nothing but thunn and you but guess." [TMQ, Al-An'nam 6: 14:81]



All of these ayat are a clear indication that Allah (swt) does not permit us to adopt ideas related to the 'Aqeedah based upon imitation or doubt. Of course, it is very clear from the context of these ayat that they allude to the 'Aqeedah and not the ahkam. Since the words 'ilm and thunn are used often regarding this issue, a definition of each needs to be given. The 'ilrn is defined by Al Jarjaani in his book At Ta'reefaat (The Definitions) as "the certain conviction that matches reality." Az Zubaydi, in the Arabic dictionary Taaj ul Aroos, reports that A1 Minawi defines 'ilrn as, "the established and definite conviction that matches reality, or it is a case where it leads to a decision whose opposite is impossible." The dctionary Lisan Al Arab adds another meaning, as "the opposite to ignorance." All of these definitions lead us to the conclusion that the 'Ilm means certainty, without any margin for error, however little it may be.



The word thunn is defined as "the conclusion that is reached from incomplete or uncertain information (imarah), and it is contrasted with certainty (yaqeen) [Mufradaat Alfaath ul Qur'an, A1 Asfahaani, p. 3271. Imam Az Zubaydi also states that thunn is 'leaning towards one of two possibilities without certainty". Al Minawi states that thunn is "the higher possibility of one of two opposites with the possibility of the opposite." However, sometimes the word thunn can be used to mean certainty. Allah (swt) says,



"'I 'thought' (thanantu) I was going to be questioned [TMQ, Al-Haqqah 69:20).



In this case, the word thanantu can only mean certainty This is determined by the context of the ayah. Thus there should be a specific sign present in the ayah that indicates certainty. However, those ayat that denounces the use of thunn do so to point up its other connotation of conjecture and doubt.



From these definitions as well as their use in the ayah previously mentioned, one reaches to the conclusion that thunn (doubt) cannot exist in the 'Aqeedah. This is the agreement of many scholars. Ibn Hazm, for example stated in his book Al Muhalla, vol 1, p2, "



"The first requirement (to be a Muslim), without which his Islam would not be accepted, is to realize in his heart with certainty and sincerity, and without any trace of doubt "that La Ila ha il Allah" Also, Ash Shatibee stated in his book A1 Muwafaqaat, vol. 1: p.29, "the 'Usul of Fiqh [basis of Islamic law] in the Deen are qata'i, [definite] not thunni [not definite]. The evidence for this is that they are part of the major foundations of Shar'iah (Kulliyyat ush Shar'iah). Anything as such must be definitive." Since the 'Aqeedah is even more basic to Islam than 'Usul ul Fiqh, it too must be established by qata'i evidences.





Types of Evidences in the Islamic 'Aqeedah


With the realization that certainty is a must in the 'Aqeedah, one must determine the types of evidences that establish this certainty. It is very obvious that the evidences must be conclusive and incontrovertible, devoid of error or doubt. There are two types of such evidences, intellectual proofs and the divine texts. The intellect is used to believe in the existence of Allah Ta'ala, in the Qur'an as the book of Allah, and in the prophethood of Muhammad (saaw). There are also other issues related to the 'Aqeedah that are proven by the intellect, such as the infallibillty of the Prophets, but they are beyond the scope of this discussion. All of these issues have definitive intellectual proofs (daleel 'aqli). They are not simply guesses to explain the reality. Rather, they are conclusions derived from profound reflection into the issue being studied, i.e. whether there is a Creator or not, is the Qur'an the speech of the Creator, and the Prophethood. In addition to these, the belief in Jannah, Jahannam, angels and jinn, the Day of Judgment, and other things beyond our perception is established through textual evidence (daleel naqli). It is very well known and accepted as part of the Islamic 'Aqeedah that every word in the Qur'an is the speech of Allah (swt). Consequently, the Qur'an is a legitimate source for extracting concepts related to the 'Aqeedah. Anyone who denies a definitive meaning from a Qur'anic text will be considered Kafir, for it constitutes a denial in the authenticity of the Qur'an.

[Islamic Revival]

However, when it comes to the hadeeth, which are also considered divine texts, there is a difference in the level of authenticity of the texts. This is at the heart of the issue of whether or not Khabr ahaad can be taken in the 'Aqeedah. Having some knowledge of the classification of the hadeeth is essential to comprehending the issue.



Classification of Ahadeeth


The scholars of hadeeth have classified the hadeeth into two main categories, hadeeth mutawatir and hadeet ahaad. This opinion is carried by scholars such as Ibn Hazm Jal Ahkam. vol. 1, pn. 104-1081, Aamidi al ahkam fi Usual al Ahkam, vol 2, PG 201, Gazali [al Mankhool min Tabqaal al Usul, pg 235-45]. Shawkani [Irshaad ul Fuhool, pg 461, Shirazai [aLum'a fi 'Usul a1 Fiah. ng. 711 a1 Kamal bin Humaam JKitab at Tahrir. vol. 3. on.301, Imam Nawawi, Ibn Hajr, A1 Khatteb a1 Baghdadi, an many others. This classification is based on the numbers of chains of narrators through which the hadeeth was reported. It is independent of any study into the actual meaning of the hadeeth, which leads to a different type of classification, i.e. sahih, hasan, or da'eef.



Hadeeth Mutawatir



The mutawatir hadeeth is the hadeeth reported to us through successive groups of people in a manner that makes it impossible for them to have conspired to lie about any aspect of the hadeeth or fabricate a riwaya (report). This would be the case when a group of the Sahabah heard the Prophet (saaw) say something, which would then be carried by them to another group of the Tabiyeen and so on until the hadeeth was documented. In this case, enough reporters in each class convey the report to ensure certainty. Such a hadeeth is considered to be hadeeth mutawatir. All scholars of hadeeth methodology and 'Usul ul Fiqh agree upon this definition of hadeeth mutawatir. Any claim otherwise is baseless, absurd, and reflects ignorance of the very well known rules in the hadeeth.



An example of this type of hadeeth is when Muhammad (saaw) said, "He who lies about me intentionally, then he deserves a seat in the Hellfire."



This hadeeth is reported by many narrators in each class of the chain, such that it is definitively established that this was said by Muhammad (saaw). Having established the criteria for the mutawatir report, it is important to know the different types of tawatur, such as the practical tawatur, tawatur by the text, and tawatur by the meaning.



Practical Ta watur (amali)



The hadeeth which report the actions of the Prophet (saaw), as opposed to his speech, and were reported to us through the means outlined above are examples of the practical tawatur. As an example, reports that Muhammad (saaw) used to pray three rak'at in the Maghrib prayer, or that he (saaw) stood on the mount of Arafat are carried to us through tawatur. There are many reports of this type of tawatur. However, they are not related to the 'Aqeedah because these reports refer to actions. However, if someone rejects part or all of the ahkam established from them, then he is a Kafir, i.e. if someone says that Maghrib is four rak'at rather than three.



Ta watur by the Text



This type of mutawatir hadeeth was narrated with the same text, from a group of the Sahabah, transmitted to groups of trustworthy, accurate reporters untd it reached the Muhaditheen who compiled them. Examples of this type are the hadeeth about the Prophet's Hawdh (fountain in Jannah) and the hadeeth mentioned earlier about those who lie on behalf of the Prophet (saaw).



Ta watur by the Meaning



This type of tawatur deals with cases where the occurrence of certain topics, subject matters, or information is overwhelmingly reported in various hadeeth. While each reported hadeeth is not mutawatir, the topic or information appears in so many hadeeth that if these topics were taken together, they would attain the level of tawatur. Hence, the scholars declared that the meaning of these topics is tawatur. This category of tawatur was debated amongst the scholars of hadeeth due to their conditions for tawatur. For example, some scholars differed on the number of reports that met the level of tawatur. The shafa'ah (intercession) is an issue transmitted to us through this type of tawatur.



Khabr ul Ahaad


The other type of hadeeth is called a1 ahaad. If the hadeeth are reported by reporters less than the number required for tawatur, then they are called khabr ul ahaad [refer to Ibn Salah in Uloom ul Hadeeth, pg. 10; 'Usul Ash Shasshi, pg 272; Ibn Hazm, al Ahkam, vol I, pg 108. Imam al Qarafi defined it to be "the report of a singular or group of Adl reporters that gives Thunn." [Sharh Tanqeeha al Usul fi Ikhtisaar al Mahsool fil Usul. Pg, 356] 'The Khabr ul ahead reports can either be Sahih[authentic], Hasan(good) or Da'eef (weak). This Khabr ul Ahaad is not necessary a description of the authenticity of the hadeeth, but rather, a description of how it reached us.



Hadeeth Ahaad



Though the hadeeth ahaad do not imply certainty, they are valid to be used under specific conditions. Some of the conditiom that were laid down by different scholars are: They have to be accepted by the Ummah [ Ibn Taymiyyah, a1 Musawwadah, vg. 2431



It should not be in contradiction with a definite text. Ash Shawkani said, "This point has its origin with the righteous predecessors." 'Aisha rejected the Hadeeth that "the dead person gets punished if his family weeps over him" [reported later by Bukhari and Muslim] because it contradicted with ayat 38-39 of Surah a1 Najm. It must not go against Ijma' Ah1 a1 Madinah (the consensus of the people of Madinah). This opinion is held by the Maliki Madhab for them, Ijma' Ah1 a1 Madinah takes precedence over the hadeeth ahaad. It must not contradict with facts proven conclusively by the mind. This opinion was held by Shawkani, Shatibee, 'Abdul Qaahir Baghdadi ('Usul ud Deen, 124.231



Therefore, all scholars agreed that hadeeth ahaad is a source of legislation but each of them had his conditions for using it. Though it is not taken in the 'Aqeedah, rejecting ahaad hadeeth as a source of Shar'iah is a denial of the Sunnah as a whole and leads one to kufr. The disagreement of the scholars regarding the ahaad hadeeth was not whether it could be used or not. Rather, the debate was regarding the conditions that justified or nullified using one particular hadeeth. However, a similar debate does not exist regarding the tawatur, because it is proven conclusively to be from the Prophet (saaw).



Does Khabr ul Ahaad produce certainty?


As previously stated, khabr ul ahaad, unlike the mutawatir hadeeth, has some margin for error. This margin of error comes from the fact that although the reporters of the sahih hadeeth are credible, they are not infallible. The majority of the scholars support this opinion.



A1 Kamal bin a1 Humaam: "Most jurists and scholars of hadeeth say that the khabr of wahid does not give certainty at all." (at Tahrir vo1.2 ~g.3681)



A1 Aamidi: He stated that "The Ummah's scholars say that khabr ul wahid gives thunn with the exception of some of the Thaahiri people and Ahmad bin Hanbali's madhab, in one of the two narrations." [ al Ahkam vol 2, pg 49-50)



Ibn Taymiyyah: In hisbook Al Musawwadh, pg 235-244, Ibn Taymiyyah quoted Ibn Abdul Barr, saying "Our companions and others differ in Khabr ul Wahid which is carried by a just person. Does it obligate certainty and action or just action? He said that the majority says that it implies action, not certainty, and it is the opinion of Shaf'i and the majority of the jurist." Ibn Taymiyyah states "Khabr ul Wahid obligates actions and is most likely to be true, rather than certainty by the saying of the majority". He in the same text quoted Juwayni, and ibn a1 Baqqilaani as those who share this opinion.



A1 Ansari: "Most scholars of 'Usul, including the three Imams (Abu Haneefah, Shafi, and Malik) are of the that opinion that Khabr ul Wahid implies Thunn only. This is whether the report is supported by signs or not (Qara'in). {Fawatih ur Rahmoot fi Sharhi Muslimat Thaboot vol 2 pg 121]



As Shawkani : "The majority of the scholars including al Mawardim Ibn Ulagah, Juwayni, say it (Khabr Ahaad) implies thunnn." [Irshad al Fuhool, pg 48-49]



As is clear from the nature of the ahaad reporters as well as the sayings of the scholars, Khabr ahaad does not constitute Ilm or yaqeen. Therefore, it cannot be used to establish an idea as part of Aqeedah. However, this does not mean that one gives no weight to these reports. These reports, which are not related to our actions but are reported by ahaad, come under te h category of Tasdiq, not iman. This idea is well established based on all of the proofs given thus far.



Refuting the arguments for taking Khabr Ahaad in the Aqeedah


Those who claim that Khabr ahaad can be taken in the 'Aqeedah, despite all the evidence against it, bring many arguments in an attempt to substantiate their claim: They say that Allah's (swt) saying, ''It is not for the Believers to go out together (for Jihad). From every group of them, a Taifah should remain to study the Deen and admonish their people when they go back to them." [TMQ, At-Taubah 9: 1221



implies that taking Khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah is acceptable. They base this on a claim that the word Taifah can mean one or more persons. Thus, since it can mean one, it is acceptable to take the 'Aqeedah from a singular report. This argument, however, is faulty for many reasons. Firstly, if we look to the context of the ayah, we see that it is asking some people to stay behind with the Prophet (saw) to learn about the Deen and then to carry it to the others. It cannot be imagined that only one person would stay behind in Madinah while all the others would go out for jihad.



In addition, though Taifah could mean one, the grammar of this ayah tells us that the word Taifah is used to mean a group. This is so because the ayah mentions that this Taifah should stay behind in order that they may learn (yatafaqahoo) their Deen. The word yatafaqahoo is in the plural form, indicating more than one person will be in the group. Therefore, it definitely means more than one.



In addition, the ayah says that a Taifah from each group should remain behind. Thus, the total of those who will stay, even if it is just one person per Taifah, would be many since there were many families, groups, and tribes taking part in the jihad. Besides the arguments regarding the meaning of the ayah, it should be noted that the issue of Khabr ahaad has no relevance to the time of the Prophet (saaw). This is because the Prophet (saaw) was still alive at that time and any news was easily verifiable The whole issue of Khabr ahaad did not even arise until many years after the death of Rasoolillah (saaw). This is because it is an issue related to the science of hadeet and the classification of their level of authenticity. This was not necessary at the time of the Prophet (saaw), but is needed today to ensure that no false idea is introduced into the Deen.



A second argument is that the saying of Allah (swt), "you who believe, if a Fasiq comes to you with an news, then verify if" [TMQ, Al-Hujurat 49:6]



means that if someone other than a fasiq comes to you with news, i.e. a trustworthy person, then it does not have to be verified. Thus, even in issues of 'Aqeeda the report of one trustworthy person is acceptable However, this argument ignores some basic aspects of understanding the Qur'an. As Imam a1 Jasas write in Ahkam ul Quran Vol 3 pg 399, "claiming that the verification is restricted to the news of the Fasiq, and that verifying the news of the trustworthy is not allow is absurd because mentioning one item from a list items does not mean that the other items are excluded from the rule". If one were to follow the understanding that this rule is only applicable to the fasiq, then he would not have any reason to verify the news of a total stranger since he would not know whether he is fasiq or not. Thus it would mean that we could take the news of anyone in the 'Aqeedah as long as we didn't know for sure that he is a Fasiq. This is an absurd understanding to take from the ayah.



Additionally, if we look to the reason for the revelation of the ayah, we will find that it was revealed after the person gave incorrect information to the Prophet (saaw) regarding a tribe to whom the Prophet (saaw) had sent him. One cannot imagine that the Prophet (saaw) would send someone who is known to be a fasiq to carry out the duties of the state, such as collecting the zakat. Thus, it is understood that this ayah only singles out the fasiq for emphasis, and not as the sole subject of the rule for verification. This understanding is supported by the actions of the Sahabah as well. In one incident, after the death of the Prophet (saaw), a Sahabi knocked on the door of 'Umar bin Khattab's home and found no answer even after the third knock. He subsequently turned away and left. When 'Umar (ra) came to answer the door and found that the Sahabi had left, he found him and asked why he left before he received an answer. The Sahabi told him that this is what the Prophet (saaw) had instructed, i.e. that if no answer is given after three knocks, then one should leave the house. Upon hearing this, 'Umar ordered him to find another person to verify this report or he would punish him. The Sahabi found others who supported his narration and 'Umar was satisfied with it. This is a clear indication that the Sahabah sometimes verified each other's reports, even though none of them are fasiq. It is also well known that in some cases Islam required the testimony of two or even four people to establish a case against a person. This is even if just one person is considered trustworthy enough. If the report of just one person is enough, even in the 'Aqeedah, :when why is it that, in some cases, it is not enough in the Islamic courts?



The fact that the Prophet (saaw) sometimes sent only one person to the rulers of other nations in order to deliver Islam to them is also taken as a daleel by some that khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah is acceptable. Again, those people misunderstand the reality of the issue. Firstly, the delegates sent by the Prophet (saaw) carried an invitation to the others to accept what they had already heard about, Islam. The other nations were already aware that Islam had taken hold of Arabia, that it was a Deen that called for the belief in Allah alone, and that the Muslims had the intention of expanding to foreign lands. Thus, when the sahabih carried this invitation them, they were not presenting it as a new idea, but rather as a diplomatic message from Muhammad (saw) to accept Islam, keep their Deen and pay jizya, or prepare for jihad. Additionally, the belief that was carried to those rulers was presented in the form of the Qur'an and the arguments regarding the oneness of Allah (swt In this case, it is not an issue of khabr ahaad or hadeet mutawatir.

[Islamic Revival]

Some people who want to bring a daleel to force the issue of khabr ahaad into the 'Aqeedah have even gone so far as to claim that since Allah (swt) sent only one Messenger to every nation, this is an indication that khabr ahead is acceptable. As undeserving as this idea is of any discussion, we would like to underscore the absurdity of such an argument. It is well known as part of the Islamic belief that all of the prophets are ma'soom (infallible). Thus, they cannot make a mistake in delivering the message to the people. How would one imagine that Allah (swt) would send a message to the people through someone who is incapable of delivering the idea. Additionally, the prophethood of each prophet was supported by miracles. Allah (swt) never asked the people to belief in the prophets without having presented to them the proof of their support from Allah (swt). Thus, those who bring the argument that the Message carried by the prophets is taken by khabr ahaad are just creating doubt about the Deen of Allah (swt) and the validity of the prophets, or they do not know how to establish the 'Aqeedah in themselves.



Even the Qur'an has become the subject of debate for some of those calling for khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah.



They claim that the last two ayat of Surah Tawbah were taken by ahaad, Therefore, if it is acceptable to take it in the Qur'an, it is acceptable in other issues of 'Aqeedah. Those who carry this type of thinking are either completely ignorant regarding the compilation of the Quran, or they have a disease in their hearts that has led them to start undermining the authenticity of the Qur'an. The last two ayat of Surah Tawbah were definitely taken by tawatur. They were memorized by many of the Sahabah, including 'Ali, the owner of the document, the two witnesses who testified that it was written in front of the Prophet (saaw), the one who compiled the Qur'an, Zayd bin Thabit, and those who supervised the task, Abu Bakr and 'Umar. Thus, even if they had found only one person with the written copy, it does not, in any way, imply that the Qur'an is not taken by tawatur. This has never been the subject of debate for 1400 years amongst the scholars. Only now, as some people and groups are desperate to attack those who call for Khilafah, are these issues being debated to this extent. They say that there is no difference between the 'Aqeedah and the ahkam (rules), and that claiming that such a distinction exists is a bid'ah (innovation). As has been discussed in the preceding sections, there is definitely a distinction between the 'Aqeedah and the ahkarn, in their nature, their value, and their impact on the Day of Judgment. Additionally, scholars such as-Shaf'i, Malik, Ghazali, a1 Baghdadee, a1 Qurafi, ibn Hajar, an Nawawi, and many others, made this distinction. Can all of these scholars be considered as Mubtadi'een (those who commit bid'ah in tne Deen)?



Another claim is that not accepting khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah is an alien idea, and that the majority of the jurists among the salaf (the previous generations), or even all of the salaf accepted it in the 'Aqeedah. Regarding this, we find that Dr. Noorudine Atar, on page 245 of his book Minhaj al Naqd fi uloom ul Hadeeth (Methodology of Critical Study in the Ilm of Hadeeth) says, "A majority of the scholars say that the 'Aqeedah needs a definite Daleel, which includes the Qur'an and the Mutawatir Hadeeth only." Similarly, Ibn Taymiyyah stated in his book A1 Musawwadah FiUsul ul Fiqh, on pg. 240, that "Khabr ul Wahid implies 'amaal (actions) and is more than likely to be true, but does not imply certainty, according to a majority of the Scholars." Consequently, we have two scholars, one recent and one old, that the majority of the scholars did not accept khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah, and that it implies thunn. Therefore, how can one still cling to the fallacious idea that the majority of the scholars take it in the 'Aqeedah, and that rejecting it is an alien idea?



One of the most popular arguments regarding this issue is that if one does not take khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah, he is rejecting a large portion of the 'Aqeedah. In support of this they bring many issues, which according to them, the people who do not take ahaad in the 'Aqeedah are rejecting. However, one should realize that if an issue is not established by a qata'i daleel, then it is not part of the 'Aqeedah. Thus, rejecting it is not rejecting the 'Aqeedah. In addition, not every issue that is not part of the 'Aqeedah is necessarily rejected as being false. Nevertheless, the following issues are some of those listed in a book by Nasir ud Deen a1 Albanee, Wu!ubul Akh-dhi Ahadeethil Ahaad fi'l 'Aqeedah (The obligation of taking Ahaad Hadeeth in the 'Aqeedah ) as being reported by Ahaad reports: The Prophethood of Adam (as): It is very well known by anyone who has ever even skimmed through the Qur'an that it establishes the Prophethood of Adam (as). He is the one to whom Allah swt) gave the information about all things, which is wahi. This is a sign of the prophethood. Also, Allah swt) says, 'Then Allah chose him and forgave him" [TMQ, Ta-ha 20: 1221



The miracles of the Prophet (saaw) other than Qur'an: Some of the miracles given to Muhammad (saaw) were mentioned in Qur'an, and others were mentioned in tawatur hadeeth, such as the increase in food. However, only the Qur'an is the miracle that was presented as a proof for the prophethood. It is the only one that was used as a challenge to the kuffar. Additionally, any miracle not proven by tawatur is not part of the 'Aqeedah, and this has no impact on any aspect of life, in this world or the next. Some of those miracles were given as a mercy to the Prophet (saaw), and some to honor him, but only the Qur'an was brought as the miracle to be carried from one generation to the next to testify to the truthfulness of the Prophet (saaw).



The Prophet's physical description : This has no relevance to the 'Aqeedah. Allah (swt) will not judge us as believers based on whether or not we knew the height or the color or the weight of the Prophet (saaw). Additionally, it is very obvious that most Muslims do not know of the Prophet's physical characteristics; does this mean that they are kafir? Of course not! The beginning of creation and the characteristics of the angels and jinn: All of these were mentioned as qata'i daleel. The Qur'an told us that the angels were created from nur and the jinn from fire. In this issue we adhere to the qata'i daleel without adding or taking anything away from it.



The punishment in the grave : The Fridav Report (vol. V, no. 1 and 2), which published a revised copy of a1 Albanee's list, quotes five ayat with some ahadeeth, yet they claim that it is established by ahaad. Should we understand this to mean that the Qur'an is by ahaad? This shows that the author of the list clearly ignored his criteria of presenting issues established by ahaad, and simply listed issues to lengthen the list, hoping it will give it legitimacy. Regarding the substance of this issue, it requires an exhaustive study of all the evidences related to it from the Qur'an and the hadeeth for any meaningful discussion. Although this is beyond the scope of this article, some aspects of it can be understood, such as the fact that there is a great debate amongst the scholars regarding the nature of the punishment. Is punishment apply to the soul only, body only, or to both? Ibn 'Abd ul Izz a1 Hanafi said, in A1 'Aqeedah at Tahaawvyah IEx~lanation of the Tahawi 'Aqeedah), "questioning in the grave is not for the soul only as Ibn Hazm and the others say", and Ibn Hajrm Fath a1 Bari ( vo1.3. vq L83)'Al Bukhari didn't address [in his book] whether the punishment will take place on the soul alone or on it and the body.





There is a famous disagreement among the people of a1 Kalam. It seems that A1 Bukhari didn't address it because the evidence which he accepts is not definite on either side". This indicates that there is no definite opinion regarding the issue of punishment in the grave. Additionally, any opinion regarding this issue should be evaluated by the understanding established by qat'ai evidences. The Qur'an mentioned in so many ayat that the punishment will follow the hisab (the questioning), and Allah (swt) will question each one individually. Many ayat also mentioned that the people, including the fasiqeen and the kafireen would ask why they were woken up after this short nap. In other words, they looked to their time in the grave as one looks to the night's sleep. This indicates that at least, there is a need to look into this issue with more depth. If it is established by qata'i evidences, it will be considered an issue in the 'Aqeedah. If it is not, then it cannot be taken in the 'Aqeedah.





Iman in the Meezan (scales of balance on the Day of Judgment): There are five ayat listed in the Friday Report to support the Iman in the meezan, so how can this understanding be by ahaad? These are just some of the issues listed, but they are enough to demonstrate the fact that the arguments of taking the khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah have no real basis. The opinion of some of the previous Imams regarding the 'Aqeedah and Khabr Ahaad Imam Ibn Taymiyyah: In his book Al Fatawa Ivol. 7, pg. 1 17- 1271, he addressed the subject of Iman and says that Iman is yaqeen (detailed and clarified conviction), and not just tasdiq (belief). He said that this is the Shari' meaning of Iman. Furthermore, he said in A1 Fatawa vol. 18. pa. 16-22, that the mutawatir hadeeth imply the 'ilm (certainty) and that one can absolutely confirm that this is true because it is mutawatir. Regarding the authentic ahaad hadeeth, he attached certain details to it before it would be able to imply the 'ilm, unlike the case of the mutawatir for which he gave only one mle. Regarding the sahih (authentic) hadeeth, which could imply certainty, Ibn Taymiyyah placed two conditions, where if either one existed then it would point up 'Ilm only. These two conditions are Ijma' a1 Ummah (Consensus of the Ummah) and Ijma' a1 'Ulema (Consensus of the Scholars). Therefore, for those who do not take any Ijma' besides that of the Sahabah, the ahaad hadeeth will not be considered as definitive.



Imam Nawawi: In his book Sharh Sahih Muslim, vol. 1 pg. 20, Imam Nawawi discusses the statement of Shaykh Ibn al-Salah who claimed that the ahadeeth in Bukhari and Muslim imply certainty. Imam Nawawi writes, "What Shaykh (ibn al-Salah) said in this issue is against what the Scholars said. Most of them said that the non-Mutawatir Hadeeth of Bukhari and Muslim, imply thunn since it is Ahaad, and the Ahaad implies nothing but the thunn. This is based on what was already known and agreed upon. This rule applies without distinguishing between Bukhari, Muslim or others. However, their Hadeeth are enough to be taken in the ahkam (rules) ." I&am Ahmad ibn Hanbal: In his book 'Usul Madhab Imam Ahmad, Dr. 'Abdullah a1 Turki summarized the issue of khabr ahaad in the 'Aqeedah, carefully discussing all reports mentioned in various Hanbali books. The following are some of his findings: There are two reports on behalf of Imam Ahmad: a report that indicates that Imam Ahmed says that khabr ahaad does not imply certainty and another report, which claims that it does imply certainty. Some Hanbali scholars tried to reconcile between these two contradictory statements by saying that what Imam Ahmed means is that the khabr ahaad implies certainty only if it is supported by other indications. The majority of the Hanbali jurists, however, say that khabr ahaad does not imply certainty, and this is obvious in reviewing many Hanbali books in 'Usul ul-Fiah [see 'Usulu Madhab Imam Ahmad, DE. 2501



Imam Shafii considers the Hujjah (proof) as one of two types: The first is the type where no one will be excused for discarding it. It is established by a clear text from the Qur'an, or an unanimously agreed upon Sunnah. This kind has no doubt in it, and anyone who refuses to accept it, then he would be asked (by the Qadi) to repent [see Ar Risalah, Arabic edition pg , English edition pg ]. This means that rejecting this type of Hujjah or Daleel is tantamount to kufr.



The second type of proof is ;hat which was narrated by a few reporters, and where the text is open to varying interpretations. It originally emanated from a single source. In this case, it is binding upon only those are informed about it and accepted it, for they cannot reject any thing mentioned in the text, in the same way that they should accept the testimony of the trustworthy However, this acceptance should not be taken in the sense of the first category. That is, if a person were to cast doubt upon it (the second type), we would not ask him to repent, while in the case of the first type of proof the person would be asked, according to shafii to repent [ see Ar Risalah, Arabic edition pg 460-61, English edition pg 278].



It is obvious from this that Imam Shaf'i distinguished between the two kinds of reports, the first being khabr a1 aamah (a synonym, based on his definition, mutawatir) and the other being khabr a1 khaasah (which is called khabr a1 ahaad). By saying that he who deny the second type will not be asked to repent, means thay Imam Shaf'i did not take it in the Aqeedah, otherwise the person would be asked to repent. The book of Imam Shaf'i was edited and printed under the supervision of great contemporary muhaddith, Ahmad Shalur. Based on what was quoted from Imam Shaf'i's Ar Risalah, we now know that he did not accept khabr a1 ahaad in the 'Aqeedah.



A1 Khateeb a1 Baghdadi, a well known faqih and muhaddith, said in his book, A1 Kifawah Fi 'Ilm A1 Riwavah. pa. 605: "Khabr a1 ahaad cannot be taken in any issue where conclusive belief ('ilm) is required. The reason is because it cannot be proven beyond a shadow of doubt that this is what the Prophet (saaw) said. However, khabr a1 ahaad should be accepted in the ahkam, such as hudood, moonsighting, hajj, zakat, inheritance, salah, and prohibiting the prohibited things, etc."



Imam A1 Ghazali says in Al Mustafa pg 145: "Khabr a1 ahaad does not imply certainty. This is a basic fact of its definition." He goes on to say in A1 Mankhool, edited by Dr. Muhammad Hassan Hito, pg. 252: "Some claim that khabr a1 ahaad imply certainty. This is impossible. "



Imam Ash Shatibee says in A1 Muwaafaaaat. vol. I, pg29-31, ''Anything related to 'Usul ud Deen ('Aqeedah) must be conclusive." He also says, "The daleel could be either ahaad or mutawatir. If it is ahaad, then it obvious that it doesn't imply certainty." He continues making distinctions between mutawatir and ahaad in the 'Aqeedah and 'Usul ul Fiqh. [vol. 1. pg. 35-361. In vol. 2,pg 15, he says: "If any conclusive daleel conflicts with a thanni daJeel, the conclusive daleel is binding."



Imam as Shawkanee: He says in his book Irshad ul Rthool: ''The other category is ahaad (whether it does not imply a1 'ilm at all or implies 'ilm with additional supports). This category does not imply certainty by itself, and this is the opinion of the majority [of Scholars]." After this explanation, as Shawkanee moves to another point, saying: 'The majority [of Scholars] agree that it is a must to utilize khabr ul ahaad in the actions." [Irshad ul Fuhool pg 48]



Syed Qutb: He writes in Fi Dhilaal a1 Qm Shade of the Our'an)? vol. 8 pg. 710. 7th edition: "Ahaadeeth a1 ahaad cannot be taken in the 'Aqeedah. The reference is the Qur'an and the hadeeth mutawatir, in the 'Aqeedah." I



From the opinions of all of these scholars and the proofs given above, it is obvious that khabr ahaad cannot be taken in the 'Aqeedah, and that it is neither a new invention nor an outdated one. Rather, it is the correct and strongest opinion in this issue.



CONCLUSION


I It is apparent that the aqueedah, by definition, tolerates no room for doubt. The aqueedah serves as a basis for our thinking, and our behavior. The Muslims should carry no idea, rule, or concept unless it is built on the Islamic aqueedah. Furthermore, no action should be undertaken without considering Islam as its reference. In other words, the Islamic aqueedah is the basis in developing the Islamic Personality. If we keep viewing the aqueedah as scattered bits of information, with no relationship between them, then the aqueedah would not have any impact on the life of the Muslim, or it would be treated as rituals or abstract ideas. This would result in a view towards Islam as a religious dogma, rather than as a comprehensive way of life. A way of life built on a spiritual and political ideology that is based on the decisive belief that this universe is created by the Creator, Allah (swt); that Allah is the only one who sets the system and order for mankind; and that we will be asked, on the Day of Judgment, about all that we did in this life. The Sahabah adhered to this aqueedah in the right way and it had a great impact on their lives. For example, they feared Allah, they always stood for the truth and never tolerated injustice, they never compromised, they never helped a tyrant in his tyranny, they maintained the sharp line that separates between Islam and Kufr, and they felt as if they were responsible for all of mankind.



When we look to the Muslim Ummah nowadays, we do not see the same impact that the Islamic aqueedah had in the past. This can be attributed to many reasons, one of which is that the Muslim Ummah is not taking the Islamic aqueedah the way it should be taken. Therefore, it is very important to comprehend the Islamic Methodology in establishing the aqueedah, and to realize that doubt, conjecture, or imitation cannot establish such an aqueedah. Rather, it has to be established through the Aql, such as believing in the existence of Allah or believing in the Quran; and through the revelation that was reported in a conclusive way, i.e. the Quran, and the Mutawatir Hadith. Kliabr ul-Ahaad, by its definition, is not conclusive, therefore, how would a person expect from such an indecisive Daleel to establish certainty?



This issue was well known by the previous Scholars, as was earlier demonstrated. The majority of them, in the past as well as in the present, established that Kliabr ul- Ahaad cannot be a Daleel in the aqueedah. Those who said otherwise did not see this issue as a problem, nor did they look to the majority who said that the Ahaad is not a Daleel, as their rivals. Neither party labeled the others as heretics. However, nowadays, some of those who say that Khabr ul-Ahaad is acceptable in the aqueedah, have begun an organized effort to attack those who do not agree with them. Indictments are now currently being made such as, " those who do not take Khabr ul-Ahaad in the aqueedah are deviants," or that "not accepting Khabr ul-Ahaad in the aqueedah mean that a person does not believe in the aqueedah," or that "they have problems in their aqueedah, [those] who do not utilize Khabr ul-Ahaad in the aqueedah," and so on.



These people must know that if one was to turn the table, one could use the same arguments and the same labels, or even harsher indictments. However, such an exercise would distract Muslims from the correct course towards the revival.



Consequently, we invite the Ummah to think into the aqueedah, and into the way it should be established. We invite our brothers who adopt the opinion of taking Khabr ul-Ahaad in the aqueedah, to reevaluate their position without being influenced by their desires, or by the imitation of others, and to correct their understanding, so as to return to the enlightened view of Islam. May Allah Ta'ala guide all of us, help all of us, forgive all of our sins, and resurrect us on the Day of Judgment with the Prophet (saws) drinking from his Hawdh (his fountain). He, and only He Subhanahu wa Ta'ala, is the one who responds to our du'a.