who do you follow?

[Rambo]

who do you follow?

salafi/whabhis?
sufis?
shias?
or others ?

out of all those i have the most respect for proper sufis.

[TrentReznor858]

None of the above?

[Wolfn]

I follow Islam.

[IbnMardhiyah]

Wolfn said

I follow Islam.

ladiesss and gentlemen, we have a winner!!

[hijabihoodlum]

my momma.


...

[Good_ol_JR]

I strive to follow the Athari Aqeeda of the Qu'ran and Sunnah in accordance with the 4 Madhabs and the renown Classical Scholars. I believe laymen should follow a Madhab and make limited taqlid; but not have any qualms about following a different Madhab's opinion so long as it is valid. And Taqlid should be limited so that it doesn't transcend into personality worship and straying from the modern- day Jummah as some extreme Madhabis have done.

I do not have a problem with Classical Sufism in it's pure, original form which in essence is little more than intense dhikr whether done individually or as a group.
But I try to avoid modern-day Sufism; as it has been infested with disgraceful Biddah practices such as dancing, singing, etc. I also try to avoid delving Sufi Theology of the Asharis/Maturdis as I feel they became useless and outdated once the Mutzailah were defeated. If a need for such theology rises again perhaps I will change my opinion.

And that's what I follow in a nutshell in terms of Aqeeda and Fiqh

[sixpakistan]

sunni muslim
hanafi fiqh
maturidi aqeedah
wannabe practitioner of tasawwuf

[dreamdeferred]

Good_ol_JR said

I strive to follow the Athari Aqeeda of the Qu'ran and Sunnah in accordance with the 4 Madhabs and the renown Classical Scholars. I believe laymen should follow a Madhab and make limited taqlid; but not have any qualms about following a different Madhab's opinion so long as it is valid. And Taqlid should be limited so that it doesn't transcend into personality worship and straying from the modern- day Jummah as some extreme Madhabis have done.

I do not have a problem with Classical Sufism in it's pure, original form which in essence is little more than intense dhikr whether done individually or as a group.
But I try to avoid modern-day Sufism; as it has been infested with disgraceful Biddah practices such as dancing, singing, etc. I also try to avoid delving Sufi Theology of the Asharis/Maturdis as I feel they became useless and outdated once the Mutzailah were defeated. If a need for such theology rises again perhaps I will change my opinion.

And that's what I follow in a nutshell in terms of Aqeeda and Fiqh

Wow........that is basically exactly where I am right now....with the caveat that I am a little more open to modern day Sufism given that most tariqas don't include singing and dancing etc. I am a little wary of excessive concern about saints and am thoroughly uncomfortable with tawassul but on the whole I'm cool with legitimate Sufism and hope to sit with a Shaykh of tassawuf one day iA.

It's taken me a long time to get here but I find myself comfortable with people who adhere to the salaffiyah manhaj and those who ascribe to a more traditionalist paradigm.

[Salika]

Good_ol_JR said

I also try to avoid delving Sufi Theology of the Asharis/Maturdis as I feel they became useless and outdated once the Mutzailah were defeated. If a need for such theology rises again perhaps I will change my opinion.

Ash'ari aqida saved my iman. In my opinion, although the enemies are different (mu'tazilas were Muslim, theological haters of Islam are not), in my opinion, there is a need for Ash'ari methodology given the intellectual fitna these days. Just my two cents. Allahu alam.

[dreamdeferred]

Salika said

Ash'ari aqida saved my iman. In my opinion, although the enemies are different (mu'tazilas were Muslim, theological haters of Islam are not), in my opinion, there is a need for Ash'ari methodology given the intellectual fitna these days. Just my two cents. Allahu alam.

Alhamdulillah! I can't speak for JR but from my pov..... while I respect the Ash'ari aqida and am not hostile to it by any means as I understand the aim of this argumentation is essentially to save a believer from anthropomorphism among other dangers....I simply find the Athari creed to be closer to the spirit of the source texts. In general I think a kind of "theological minimalism" is the safer route

[Salika]

dreamdeferred said

Alhamdulillah! I can't speak for JR but from my pov..... while I respect the Ash'ari aqida and am not hostile to it by any means as I understand the aim of this argumentation is essentially to save a believer from anthropomorphism among other dangers....I simply find the Athari creed to be closer to the spirit of the source texts. In general I think a kind of "theological minimalism" is the safer route

No need to defend yourself. There is nothing wrong with Athari aqida but to call Ash'ari aqida useless and outdated is not only an injustice, but wrong.

[dreamdeferred]

Salika said

No need to defend yourself. There is nothing wrong with Athari aqida but to call Ash'ari aqida useless and outdated is not only an injustice, but wrong.

I wasn't defending myself......just thought I'd try and explain where an Athari might be coming from. We'll let JR explain himself.

[Good_ol_JR]

I guess I fail to see what benefit methodology could do for laymen such as ourselves. By making Taqlid of Ashari/Maturdi you're taking in some pretty complex, heavy handed, somewhat controversial details many of which can't be summarized. I could understand if a scholar well-versed in Islamic scholarship and theology delved into that stuff, but I fail to see what usefulness such a HEAVY, controversial subject would be to laymen living in these times when 99% of the world populations couldn't care less about theology.

The era of theological debate which was prevalent amongst the Greek Byzantines/Mutazalite societies no longer exists. During those times many scholars basically used a lesser, minor biddah to combat the major biddah perpetuated by the Philosophers and the Mutazalites. The means the Muslim theologians used were controversial, but somewhat understandable given the immense power and violent methods the Muzalites employed at the time. So even though they may have played with fire; we can be sure that they were well-intentioned because it was done in order to combat the greater evil spread by the heretics. So InshAllah they will be forgiven for the unorthodox methods they had to use to combat the greater fitnah.

But in today's times there is no need for Muslims, especially laymen to burden ourselves with such a complex, controversial topic especially when we have so many bigger things to worry about and very few powerful people in this world place any emphasis on theology. So let's just stick to the Qur'an and Sunnah and use these to unite and strengthen this weak, disunited Ummah.

Sh. Yasir Qadhi deals with this topic in his lecture Perfect Justice Debunking the male bias myth lecture

Yasir Qadhi - Perfect Justice: Debunking the Male Bias Myth | Halal Tube

Regarding modern-day Sufis, I'll admit I'm a bit bias by all the vids I see of prominent Shaykhs such as Habib Ali Jifri dancing in the Hadra; but maybe I ought to check out the more conservative Tariqas

[thejellymill]

I follow the smell of food

[sixpakistan]

Good_ol_JR said

Regarding modern-day Sufis, I'll admit I'm a bit bias by all the vids I see of prominent Shaykhs such as Habib Ali Jifri dancing in the Hadra; but maybe I ought to check out the more conservative Tariqas

How exactly is Habib Ali Jifri not "conservative?" He's as orthodox as they come.

You cite a lecture by Yasir Qadhi. Yasir Qadhi thinks that it's Islamically fine to shake hands with na-mehrams, and goes around calling dead shaykhs mushrikeen. Is that conservative?

As for the hadra, group dhikr is supported by strong and authentic evidence from the Sunnah. You define "conservative" by whether someone participates in hadra or not? Do you consider Sh. Nuh Keller to be conservative?