An Introduction to the Principles of Argumentation in ‘Aqeedah
Picture yourself in this situation.
You’re giving a Halaqa to a group of new french-speaking converts. Most of them are new in the religion, and they’re all very interested in learning what are the basic obligations of Islam. Its a very diverse group, even though its geared for converts: there’s some old men, young teenagers, some Muslims, some non-Muslims and yes, converts.
In the middle of your class, you start quoting the view of a contemporary scholar, and a man in the front row shoots his hand up immediately. Visibly infuriated, this man decides to take this opportunity to warn against you, against the scholar you were quoting, calling you out and saying you’re such-and-such a person, with such-and-such a belief, and those upon this way are misguided.
What do you do? How do you respond?
While this specific situation would requires more tact because this man has has quite possibly come with an agenda to misguide those new converts into his group or line of thinking, such arguments must generally be approached with a consistant approach.
There are various ways one can argue a point: one can use many different arguments from one’s rationality, from the revelation, from many sources; however one will often come to various conclusions due to the various methods being used. If I were to say that a particular cake is the best cake ever, and you were to say that another particular cake is the best cake ever, we both came to this conclusion based on a methodology, a differenct choice of priorities: while you may judge based on the size of the cake or its texture, I may judge on the aftertaste which it leaves in the mouth, or other different traits.
Yes, I know, this example is not the best one for the topic, since one’s preference in eating chocolate cake over cheese cake is not a domain in which differing is disallowed. However, what about differing in the ‘Aqeedah? Surely there are some small aspects of the ‘Aqeedah wherein differing is permissable, yet, usually when we are discussing the science of Islamic Belief, we are talking about something about which differing is not allowed. One may argue a certain point in the realm of this department and come to a conclusion which is at odds with another person’s conclusion: ie One person may argue that there is no God, while another argues that there is, and they both base their argument on a set of arguments.
One would need a set of principles that one should refer to; this is in fact the methodology of the scholars of the past: when they would debate such important topics, they would return to common principles and prove to the other party why they were incorrect according to their own methodology.
Inshallah I plan on going through an excellent book called Usool al Istidlal ‘ala Masaa’il ul-I’tiqaad ‘inda Ahlus Sunnati wal Jama’ah by ‘Uthman ‘Ali Hasan, written as a Masters Thesis which was supervised by the Dr. Nassir al-’Aql, who wrote an excellent work which is translated into english entitled ‘The Methodology of Ahlus-Sunnah in Deriving Aqeedah’. I’ll be posting here from time to time on this subject, so keep your eyes peeled inshallah