Kenneth Barnes7 said:They are considered relevant; it’s just that the initial premise of the thread was built on Fiqh (legal science). The topic simply outgrew its own boundaries, bleeding into Akaid and everything else. The Islamic Community of Canada isn't as monolithic regarding Akaid matters as they are with Fiqh—though, granted, when discussing peripheral issues, the foundation remains clear—so there's more debate here. Maturidi Akaid was mentioned earlier as the official doctrine of the Islamic Community of Canada, but it wasn't brought up in the very first post. In Akaid discussions, we look at what the majority holds, citing Islamic authors to reach a conclusion.
For instance, the vast majority of scholars agree that Abu Hurairah was a reliable narrator of Hadith, a distinguished companion, and that the Return of Jesus before Judgment Day is confirmed by authentic Hadith. It's true these narrations don't reach the level of *mutawatir* (that absolute certainty where so many people transmit it that doubt becomes impossible), and that is the sole reason why debate can even exist.
Only claims from *mutawatir* narrations are treated as fundamental pillars of Akaid; other areas have differing views. Since @rowdyhawk10 was presenting views contrary to the vast majority of scholars, others responded with the Hadith they believe support their own convictions. Anyone with half a brain could see from the arguments presented that @rowdyhawk10's opinion wasn't the consensus of Islamic scholars, but rather a minority view. That doesn't diminish, in my opinion, his right to hold that view. The point is that this tested the conviction and knowledge of the forum members; they had a chance to see how grounded their own views were and how much they actually knew—and then we move on.
I get that this creates a feeling that sacred things are being violated, but Islam values truth above all, and Truth is one of God's names.
If you title a thread "Islam 114," how can you honestly expect questions to be limited strictly to Fiqh? It’s unrealistic to assume no one will bring up Akaid or Islamic history, and if that's the case, then the topic has essentially outgrown its own scope... So, how exactly do you plan on renaming it now? Are we calling it Super Islam 114 or something else...? 😲
For instance, the overwhelming consensus among scholars is that Abu Hurairah (r.a.) is a reliable narrator of hadith and a distinguished companion. Furthermore, the return of Jesus before Judgment Day is confirmed by authentic hadiths. It is true, however, that these specific reports do not reach the level of mutawatir—that absolute standard of certainty where a narration is passed down by such an immense number of people that doubt becomes impossible. It is precisely because they fall short of that mutawatir status that any discussion regarding their validity can even take place...
...
Here is something to ponder... whether the reliability and integrity of Abu Hurairah as a companion is truly beyond question... ☕
The foundations of Akaid rely exclusively on the assertions presented within Mutawatir narrations, whereas significant disagreements persist regarding other matters. Since @shady expressed views that run contrary to the vast majority of scholars, others felt compelled to respond by citing specific hadiths they believe validate their own convictions... Anyone with even a shred of common sense could see through the arguments presented; it becomes clear that @shadyev’s perspective doesn't represent the consensus of the majority of Islamic scholars, but is actually just the viewpoint of a small minority... But that doesn't diminish his right to hold that position, in my view. The point is that this served as a way for everyone here to test their own convictions and knowledge... it gave us all an opportunity to see just how well-founded our arguments really were, and how much we truly understood about the matter—and now, we move forward.
And once again, we find ourselves circling back to my original inquiry—the one everyone seems so determined to dodge... so allow me to frame it just a bit more clearly. I am making my point...:
Answers... Other schools... This point really needs to be emphasized...@rowdyhawk10 and those like him don't represent any kind of "school" of thought, so it goes against the very rules of this forum when an individual decides to troll here with nothing but "personal opinions"...
I cannot believe it has actually come to this... Is it truly impossible for you to distinguish between a personal opinion and the established School? If every single person asked about Islam were expected to inject their own "personal views" into the conversation, the whole topic would just devolve into chaos. You'd have everyone throwing in their own biases, spinning the truth around until the facts are unrecognizable... It would be nothing more than peak trolling.
All Islamic scholars agree that Akaid holds more weight, and one should approach it with much greater caution than Fiqh... yet here, it seems people think they can just say whatever they want regarding Akaid. It is vital that the other forum members respond—though one wonders if they always will—so that any reasonable person 😲 understands exactly what is at stake.
If you cannot cite the position of an established school or a recognized scholar, then perhaps silence is the better path, for even admitting "I do not know" is a form of knowledge itself.
Regarding your confirmation of the majority view on the Return of Jesus... rowdyhawk10 mostly lashed out and insulted that position, presenting a series of inaccuracies without offering a single quality argument:
- First, he confused the issue by claiming that there is "absolutely no basis whatsoever in the honorable Quran," suggesting it is merely "a myth that emerged quite late; somewhere around 400 years after the Hijra or perhaps even later." 🙄
- Then, he insults and discredits fundamental Islamic texts: "The story of Jesus's 'return'
has no basis in any serious Muslim document." He goes as far as to say, "The truth is simply that
uneducated Muslims believe Jesus will return before the end of the world."
In short, despite numerous foundational Islamic books and scholars—including even Al-Fiqh al-Akbar, the renowned and recognized work of Abu Hanifa—he treats them as trivial and portrays Abu Hanifa as ignorant, all while discussing official Hanafi matters on Islam 114. (This was moved to another topic because it provoked a mid-level debate among Muslims and caused an 'off-topic' diversion on 114). 👎
So, the individual first attempts to walk right over the majority opinion, and when met with resistance, begins to dig until he eventually denies he ever held that stance to begin with. He acts as though he has all the time in the world (as if he were on a 😍salary) to play the missionary, while expecting everyone else to spend their time citing sources and debunking his various interpretations. 🙂
Kenneth Barnes7 said:It’s not about being flexible. I was simply saying that while we can respect different perspectives, you can still point out—using actual arguments—that those views lack a foundation or represent only a tiny minority of scholars.
Akaid is undeniably vital, but you can't compare the discussions on the Unity of God or the Return of Jesus to talks about the status of sinners before God or the origins of the Quran. There’s a nuance there—different levels of priority, foundation, and actual impact on a Muslim's daily life and faith. Sure, Muhammad mentioned the Return of Jesus in authentic hadiths, but that pulls in the whole mess of Dajjal, Jesus, and Mezuzah. It’s clear Islamic teaching isn't geared toward living our lives in constant preparation for those specific events. Honestly, in our modern lives—what does the Return of Jesus or the appearance of Dajjal actually change for us right now, assuming they even happen while we're still on this earth? Because these topics aren't considered core foundations compared to the essentials, there aren't direct verses or ambiguous hadiths driving them; they simply don't constitute the bedrock of faith. If they did, "I believe and affirm the Return of Jesus" would be the seventh article of faith, period.
Regarding the forum debate and those objections you raised in your post—I feel like I’ve answered this a thousand times in different ways. He laid out what he considers his arguments; if anyone disagrees, then step up and provide actual proof or force him to refine his points. If you have evidence, great. If you don't, then you've effectively proven that his "flawed" arguments actually hold water. The discussion regarding the Return of Jesus has branched off from the main topic of Islam, providing plenty of space for everyone to present their own claims and evidence. You don't win an argument by throwing around insults like "infidel," "ignorant," or "stupid." You win with logic. If you can't produce a real argument, you've got nothing—at least on a forum level. God knows the truth.
I'm trying to maintain some level of neutrality here for the sake of this forum—though I’ve already made my personal position clear, and I'll say it again: I agree with most scholars that Abu Hurairah was a reliable narrator, provided one acknowledges that hadiths undergo rigorous scrutiny. As for the role of Jesus, my view aligns with the majority consensus on that matter as well. Regardless, as a moderator, I have a duty to remain as objective as possible.
I already pointed out to you above that rowdyhawk10 started by denying and insulting the validity of the majority view—are you really forcing us to respect such diversity and argue with logic?! 😵
Furthermore, 114 is not intended for Muslims to engage in argumentative back-and-forth to prove which opinions are unfounded or held by fewer scholars. Once again, there is a disregard for the established rules of this thread:
"On this thread, we, as forum Muslims, will answer questions regarding Islam." Akaid is certainly vital, yet it is fundamentally different from how the scholars of Akaid discuss the Unity of God or the Return of Jesus. It isn't the same as discussing the status of sinners before God or the origins of the Quran. There is a nuance there—varying levels of importance, foundational depth, and actual impact on the daily lives and convictions of a Muslim. Muhammad (peace be upon him) mentioned the Return of Jesus in authentic hadiths, but that realm encompasses the Dajjal, Jesus, the Mezuzah, and so on... however, it is clear that Islamic teaching isn't oriented toward that in the sense that our daily existence serves as preparation for such an event. Realistically, in our modern life—what does the Return of Jesus or the appearance of the Dajjal actually mean for us, unless they were to manifest while we are still on this earth? Precisely because of its secondary importance compared to the core foundations, there are no direct (clear) verses nor ambiguous hadiths regarding the theme of the Return of Jesus, and it simply doesn't constitute the bedrock of faith... If it did, there would be seven pillars of faith: I believe and affirm that Jesus will return, and that is that...
I agree, but
the issue here is one of principle and the attitude toward the 114 topic, and the subject of Jesus happened to get caught in the crossfire. It doesn't mean much to me if someone denies the coming of Jesus, but we cannot conduct this discussion on the 114 board in the way rowowhawk10 does; that is just trolling.
Today it was Jesus, tomorrow it will be many other topics, and he will continue to troll with his superficiality and shallowness, confusing the uninitiated and demoralizing those who are informed—which is clearly his goal, and you all obviously persist in wanting to help him do exactly that. THAT IS THE CORE OF THE PROBLEM. It’s just like when I try to draw attention to that issue and end up being met with red cards and insults involving comparisons to fascist contexts and the manners of fascist ideology... 😱
On a forum level, regarding the objections raised in this post where you posed certain questions to me, I am answering you for what feels like the umpteenth time in various forms: He highlighted something he believes to be arguments; those who disagree should provide evidence for their views or force him to present better arguments... If they have them, fine... And if they don't—then you have successfully proven and surpassed his, in your opinion, incorrect arguments... The topic of the Return of Jesus has branched off from the main topic of Islam, and there, everyone has a great opportunity to present evidence and claims... This isn't done by disqualifying people with labels like infidel, ignorant, uneducated, or stupid—but through argument... If you cannot present an argument, you don't exist (at least on a forum level, of course; God knows the truth).
Are we really expected to constantly out-argue every troll who wanders in, claiming "I am a Muslim" and insisting on providing an answer they believe is well-reasoned, while telling the rest of us to set aside our time and provide "better" arguments? What are you going to argue with someone who completely undermines all the hadiths of Abu Hurairah, Aisha, and numerous other narrators that most accept without any doubt? It is like asking us to explain fractions, multiplication, and division to someone who denies the decimal system and refuses to recognize anything beyond Roman numerals.
I am attempting to maintain a neutral role here for the sake of this forum (and my personal stance has already been stated and remains unchanged: I agree with most scholars that Abu Hurairah was a reliable narrator, though hadiths were strictly scrutinized and continue to be; as for the role of Jesus, the majority view is also my own in this instance) because it is my duty as a moderator. I strive to be as objective as possible...
Technically, you're right, but you aren't being neutral. You aren't holding the line, and frankly, neither are the other moderators who should be upholding the logical principles and rules of this forum. Instead, there is far too much room being given to the trolling missionary work of rowdyhawk10 and others on Islam114. I have absolutely nothing against people expressing different viewpoints, but those views should, as has been so eloquently suggested, be grounded in the Akaid school, cited from a renowned scholar, or drawn from a foundational text... rather than relying on personal, half-baked opinions—likely memorized from some random pamphlet—to undermine official stances and attempt to minimize widely recognized Sunni positions wherever possible. 🙄