Answer to an Enemy of Islam

[Muslims] to believe in the Qur’ân al-kerîm only, in
addition to doing what Muslims have heretofore agreed on.
What damages Islam is the parting of Muslims into groups
and each group’s following only the imâm which they prefer
and those scholars who follow him, and being bigoted
against those who follow other mujtahid imâms. This
breaking into groups may go as far as abandoning the Book
and the Sunna. I have shown more facility in these sort of
matters. I have given the liable person the freedom to
accept whichever point of view he wishes, provided he will
not follow the desires of the nafs and he will be as cautious
as he can. But, al-Imâm al-Ghazâlî, though deeming it
permissible to abandon these matters completely, puts a
limit to the field of activity for those who want to follow
religious practices. He almost compels them to employ
ijtihâd.”
The religion reformer’s greatest error is his confusing the
breaking of Muslims into groups in i’tiqâd (belief) with the parting
of Ahl as-Sunna into madhhabs. He speaks ill of the four
madhhabs as he does of the groups of bid’a and blemishes Muslims
as if they have dissented from the Book and the Sunna. All the
seventy-two groups who have deviated in i’tiqâd are certainly
heretical. It is stated in a hadîth sherîf that they will all go to Hell.
Yet, if not hostility against Islam, what else may his attacking the
four a’immat al-madhâhib of Ahl as-Sunna be, who were praised
in the Hadîth ash-sherîf and who won Allâhu ta’âlâ’s Love and
Approval because they obeyed Rasûlullah (’alaihi ’s-salâm)? Such
an enemy of Islam who appears as a man of religious ranking is
called a zindîq. Our religion declares that zindîqs and munâfiqs are
worse and more harmful than the non-Muslims with or without a
Book. The religion reformer does not feel shame for changing al-
Imâm al-Ghazâlî’s words quoted in the previous article and
adapting them to his personal point of view. Deeming himself an
’âlim and a mujtahid like Hadrat al-Imâm al-Ghazâlî, he attempts
to direct Islam as he wishes. He is not aware that this stupid
behaviour of his is worse than that of the seventy-two groups he
blames.
33– The religion reformer opposes the unanimity of the
a’immat al-madhâhib, too, and says:
“It is impossible to admit the claim that there was an
ijmâ’ (unanimity) on the decision that the talfîq (unification,
combination) of the madhâhib was wrong. There are
– 47 –