Question For Abu Z

[Wayfarer]

Assalamu alaikum,

Is it correct for someone to say that the sources of Islam are:

1. Qur'an
2. Sunnah
3. Understanding of the Salaf

Because I've never heard of the last point as a source per se...is it correct to use that when referring to the sources of Islam, and if not why?

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

As-sallamu 'alaikum

The sources of Islaam are said to be:

1-Qur'an
2-Sunnah
3-Ijmaa' (concensus)
4-Qiyaas

in accordance to the understanding of the salaf as-salih who are best equipped to understand these sources.

wa ALLAHU A'lam

[Um Abdullah M.]

like brother Abu Imaan said

it is their understanding of the meaning of these sources, their understanding of the texts of the Quran and Sunnah.

[Abuz Zubair]

'alaikum as-salaam wrt wbk,

Wayfarer... where have you been?


I have never come across the last principle mentioned in the works of usul as a source of law.

I think the brother is getting mixed up. Manhaj of the Salaf isn't ONE of the sources. It is an entire manhaj one should adhere to with respect to everything in life, be it fiqh, usul al-fiqh, theology, manners, etc.

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

maybe the brother was refreing to the athaar of the salaaf in respect to hadith mawquf, and the legal positons of the salaf? Allahu a'lam

[Abuz Zubair]

To be honest, I don't think the brother himself knows exactly what he's referring to. (not wayfarer, but the one he was speaking to)

[sunnih]

To be honest, I don't think the brother himself knows exactly what he's referring to. (not wayfarer, but the one he was speaking to)

I think (if I am not mistaken) the brother is refering to one of the writings of sheikh Albani where it says that saying that you follow Qur'an and Sunnah is not the whole clarification and you should add to it: "upon the understanding of the salaf". However, as you have quite rightly have mentioned this minhaj is in all the matters of this deen be it foundations or branches.

[Wayfarer]

Assalamu alaikum,

Abu Zubair: I have been hiding out in the Westcountry with the farmers and the pirates...oo arrrr... :D

Yes the brother who mentioned this is actually a friend of mine who follows the SPUBS manhaj and we never really discuss those issues directly because we are both in a place where Muslims are hard to come by, let alone Ahl al-Sunnah. It was just something he mentioned in passing and as far as I know it was not from the sources of Islam...possibly just a misunderstanding of what some of the ulama have said.

But to reiterate part of my question, why is it not considered to be a 'source' of Islam...what is the difference between a source of our religion and our understanding of it? My instincts tell me it may have something to do with the fact that the salaf only confirmed the manhaj left by the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and is therefore not offering anything new per se, but merely showing that it was understood in this way as opposed to someone else's subjective opinion...would that be correct?

As opposed to say Ijma' or qiyas which may in fact come with something not directly mentioned...??

[Abuz Zubair]

But to reiterate part of my question, why is it not considered to be a 'source' of Islam...what is the difference between a source of our religion and our understanding of it?

A source for Islamic rulings is the Quran. Another source is the Prophet's Sunnah (Mutawatir, Ahad, Sahih, Mursal, etc). Another source is Ijma' of the Ummah. Another source is Qiyas, etc.

How to put these components together, and how to understand, or derive rulings from these sources is the science of Usul al-Fiqh.

Usul al-Fiqh itself has certain rules and regulations that are agreed upon amongst the Salaf, and those that are disagreed over. For instance, the Salaf agreed that the statement of the Prophet takes precedence over the statement of a Sahabi. So if anyone disagrees with this principle in Usul al-Fiqh has disagreed with the Salaf.

But the Salaf disagreed with respect to other principles, and their exact usage, such as Maslaha, Sadd al-Dhara'i or Istihsan, and hence, their understanding with respect to these sources differed.