What is your opinion of those who accuse the people of the Sunnah of being Murji'ah because they do not make action a condition for the validity of faith?

The questioner: His EminenceThe Shaykh : As long as action is a condition for perfection, not a condition for validity, as the Mu'tazilah and the Khawarij say, some people accuse the people of the Sunnah, or accuse some of the Salafis, of being Murji'ah. This is because they believe that if we say that action is a condition for perfection, that leads to the belief that faith is mere speech without action. They say this is the statement of the Murji'ah. So, since you Salafis do not declare as disbelievers those who abandon actions, and among those actions are the five pillars, and also those who abandon judging by other than what Allah has revealed, without denying it or considering it permissible, then you are Murji'ah. So what is your response to this false accusation? May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : First, what concerns us is not the newly coined terms, but following the truth wherever it is. So whether it is said that this is the school of the Khawarij or the Mu'tazilah, they say with us: "There is no god but Allah, Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." Does the fact that we agree with them on this good word mean that we should deviate from it because others who are deviating from the truth also say it? Obviously, the answer is no. Rather, as came in some authentic hadiths, we revolve with the truth wherever it revolves. Those who accuse the people of the Sunnah, who say what we mentioned regarding the position of the Imams, of being Murji'ah, what is this "Ijrā'" (postponement of faith) in their view? What is this "Ijrā'"? Those who say "Ijrā'" do not say that faith increases and decreases with righteous deeds. Therefore, there is a very clear difference between the people of truth and the Murji'ah. We know that the scholars of the Salaf mention that some of the sects of the Murji'ah who say that faith does not increase or decrease, one of them does not hesitate to say, "My faith is like the faith of Jibril (Gabriel)." This is transmitted, because the reality of faith in their view is not subject to increase or decrease. The school of "Ijrā'" is contrary to our statement that faith increases and decreases, and as came in the question, which does not need repetition, that its increase is through obedience and its decrease through disobedience. The deviation of those who say "Ijrā'" has actually reached a point where they contradicted texts, other than the texts that explicitly indicate in the Book and the Sunnah that faith increases. They said, based on their statement that faith does not increase or decrease, that word, and they built upon it that it is not permissible to make a condition in faith. It is not permissible to say, "I am a believer, if Allah wills." And they derived from this statement a very serious ruling, which is declaring as disbelievers those who make a condition in their faith. So whoever says, "I am a believer, if Allah wills," it has come in the books of branches that it is not permissible for a Hanafi to marry a Shafi'i, because they make a condition in their faith. This was issued by some of their scholars previously. Then came one who was thought to be among their reformers or among the moderate ones among them, and he issued a ruling of permissibility. But the truth is that I wonder, which is more dangerous: this one who issued a ruling of permissibility with the following reasoning, or those who explicitly stated that it is not permissible for a Hanafi to marry a Shafi'i because they doubt their faith? The one who doubts in her faith is not a Muslim, nor from the People of the Book, so it would not be permissible to marry her, even if she were from the People of the Book. So this one, who might be thought to be among the moderate ones among them, answered when he was asked, and he is known as the Mufti of the Two Weighty Groups (the two major groups of scholars), and he is the author of the Tafsir, he said it is permissible. And the reasoning now is the place of admonition: "placing them in the position of the People of the Book." So this is the answer of the Murji'ah. And there is no doubt that those who accuse the people of truth, regarding what was explained above, that faith increases and decreases, etc., they are saying about the people of truth what is not in them. And in my opinion, they know what they are saying and they know that they are wrong in what they are saying. So the difference, in my opinion, is very clear between the creed of the Salaf and the Murji'ah. How great is the difference between the two groups! And the injustice is from these young people today who accuse the followers of the righteous Salaf of being Murji'ah. Yes.

The questioner : Then, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah divided the sects of the Murji'ah into three categories. Some of them say that faith is merely what is in the heart. And some of them say that it is merely the speech of the tongue. And this is not known for anyone before the Karamiyyah, the known sect.

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : And there is a third statement of the Murji'ah, and they are the Murji'ah of the jurists, for they say it is the affirmation of the heart and the speech of the tongue. And most of the Murji'ah, as we have learned from your excellence, hold the view that it does not increase or decrease, nor does it become partial, nor do its people differ in it, but the faith of all is the same. As for the Salafis, the people of Hadith and the Sunnah, they say that it is belief, speech, and action, that it increases and decreases, becomes partial, and its people differ in it. And they make a condition in faith, and they see that it is a root and a branch.