Did a disagreement occur among the Companions regarding the fundamentals of religion?

The Shaykh : Did a disagreement occur among the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) regarding the fundamentals of religion?
Answer: No. One of the things by which Allah protected the first generation, the noble Companions, was that He protected them from disagreement in the fundamentals of religion and their beliefs. This is unlike what befell those who came after them in the third century and those after them; they disagreed in the fundamentals of religion, contrary to what the majority of scholars today assume. When you discuss with them the topic of disagreement between the schools of jurisprudence, the first thing they say is: "My brother, the disagreement is in the branches, not in the fundamentals!" This is incorrect speech. We do not say it is a lie, because we do not want to be excessive in our speech; rather, it is incorrect speech. The one who says that the disagreement is only in the branches is a man who is not even considered a beginner student of knowledge, even according to the fundamentals of the later scholars. These students are supposed to have read *Tawhid* or what they call *Tawhid*; for example, they should have read *al-Jawharah* on the *Tawhid* of the Asha'irah, or *'Aqidat al-Taftazani* and similar works of the Hanafis, and the commentary on *Badr al-Imani*, and so on, in *al-Fiqh al-Akbar* attributed to Imam Abu Hanifah. Whoever reads these books will realize that there is disagreement in the fundamentals, and it is not limited only to the branches.
We also do not want to delve into the details of that, because the question is very limited: Did the Companions disagree in the fundamentals of religion? The answer is: They did not disagree in any of that at all. The reason for this is clear, and it is limited to two things. The first thing is that they received the religion directly from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), who does not err. As for these later scholars, they received it from scholars who varied in their knowledge, jurisprudence, and mindfulness of Allah. As for the first group, there is no doubt that they were noble scholars and righteous people, but they were not protected from error. Therefore, those who took knowledge from them are not like the Companions who took knowledge from the protected Messenger. Consequently, some erroneous opinions occurred, whether in branch issues or in fundamental issues.
This is the first reason why the Companions did not disagree in the fundamentals. The second reason is that the people of desires and religious innovations had not yet begun to infiltrate the Companions and their minds. They were still holding fast to the firm rope from which there is no severance. As for the later scholars, religious innovations began to infiltrate them through the path of the Khawarij, an early sect that declared sinners disbelievers, and the path of the Murji'ah, a sect that excluded deeds from faith, who say that faith does not increase or decrease. The school of the Hanafis is on this position even today. The school of the Hanafis even today: "Faith does not increase or decrease," despite the clear text of the Noble Qur'an: , and so many well-known verses in the Noble Qur'an explicitly state that faith accepts increase.
The Companions, due to their direct connection to the Messenger (peace be upon him) and their lack of influence from the people of religious innovation and desires, because they were, as we said, holding fast to the firm rope.
I recall now a hadith of Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) in *Sahih Muslim* that it was reported to him from some of the Tabi'un that he denied the divine decree. Perhaps it was a man named "Ma'bad." What was it? I forgot.

Eid Abbasi : "al-Juhani."

The Shaykh : "al-Juhani." It was reported to him that he denied the divine decree, so he said to the reporter: "Inform him that I am innocent of him." Then he mentioned the hadith of 'Umar; he narrates it from his father 'Umar, the hadith of Jibril: when he came in the form of a man with intensely white clothes and intensely black hair, to the end of the hadith. So he asked him about faith, and he said: to the end, . This "Ma'bad al-Juhani" began in the era of the Companions to deny the divine decree, which is the principle of the Mu'tazilah and leaving the community. First, because Ibn 'Umar was receiving the hadith from his father 'Umar from the Messenger of Allah; there is no doubt for them; and therefore he struck Ma'bad at the core, conveying to him his disavowal of him; because he denied a belief among the beliefs of the Muslims that the Companions received from the Messenger (peace be upon him), directly from the Messenger.
Yes.