This is a brief description of HT - and of course they debate about Allah without knowledge, without Guidance, without Book and without Light - and we have sat with them often - and one we mentioned to one of them whilst discussing the 'Khabarul-Aahaad', we said: If it appears to you that the truth is that it is obligatory to accept the Khabarul-Aahaad - then will you do so? he said 'No, because I have to stick to the view of the party.' So they make it binding that if the view of the party contradicts your view - you have to hold the view of the party, not your own view. So we said: Then what is the point of discussing with you - if you will not give up the view of the party in favour of the clear proof. Since they have laid down a rule - that the person has to stick to the opinion of his imaam or his nation. Well what if that involves some sin, since that ruler, khaleefah or group may be right or wrong - so if a mistake is made then how can he still hold to that knowing that is is haraam.
Imagine, for example, that the ruler is a Hanafee who holds that drinking little alcohol - an amount nut sufficient to intoxicate is allowed but that which is forbidden is the final cup which intoxicates. Then does a person in this case have to hold to the opinion of his imaam? Or if his imaam, for example, holds the saying that the Quraan is created - as happened to Imaam Ahmad - then does he have to take on his view - and the practise of the salaf is contrary to this.
This is a brief account of HT - and HT do not follow Islaam but only support the idea of Islaam and they have wierd (and incorrect) opinions - for example, they do not order their wives to dress Islamically, since they say that men do not have any authority over women until the Khilaafah has been established - and of course this is contrary to the laws of Allah - subhaanahu wa ta'aalaa - in that the man has to strive to save his family from the Fire:
O you who believe, save yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is men and stones. [Tahreem 66:6]
QUESTION. They say: "I accept the hadeeth in Bukhaaree is saheeh but I don't believe in it." What should be our response and attitude towards such people?
A. The text of theirs saying as occurs in their book 'ad-Doosiyyah' is that these ahadeeth - and an example of this is: "When one of you finishes the last tashahhud then let his say: 'O Allah I seek refuge in you from the punishment of the grave and the punishment of the Hell-fire and from the trials of life and death and the trials of Dajjal.'" - They say: 'I act in this as it is knowledge - that is: We say that saying: "....." however we do not believe in it?! This is a crazy contradiction - how can you affirm a saying and not believe in it? this is not rational / sensible. As if you are saying: I say it with my tounge and do not believe it in my heart. they do not believe that there is any punishment in the grave - they do not believe it but they say: We affirm it.
QUESTION. There are other authentic ahadeeth about the punishment of the grave - which are not ahaad.
A. Of course they do not believe in the 'Mutawaatri al-Ma'nawee' (the hadeeth whose meaning is mutawaatir) - the mutawaatir in the science of hadeeth is of two catergories:
(i) Mutawatirul-Lafzee (whose wording is mutawaatir) - such as the hadeeth: "Let he who lies against me intentionally take his seat in the Fire." and (ii) Mutawatirul-Ma'nawee (i.e. they differ in wording but are the same in meaning) such as the hadeeth about the descent of 'Eesaa - 'alaihi salaam - many hadeeth but not with a single meaning - rather they agree on a single fact - the descent of 'Eesaa, the coming of Dajjaal, the coming of the Mahdee - 'alaihi salaam - all of these are to them aahaad - even if they agree in the sense and meaning as long as they are not reported with a single wording
So they do not recognise the Mutawaatirul-Ma'nawee. therefore all the Sunnah to them is aahaad except a small part - but is we ask the,: "What is mutaawaatir from it?" - Then they cannot answer - so this saying: "we affirm it but do not believe it" is a contradictory saying - not possible as the poer says: "The worst of impossible things is to bring two opposites at one time," such as to say "it is night and day" at one time - that is not possible. "This living and dead", "You affirm and you do not believe." Whereas belief (I'tiqaad) is affirmation (tasdeeq) with certainty, as they say: "Belief (I'tiqaad) is affirmation with certainty which is according to the true state of affairs - upon proof and clear signs." So how can you say that you affirm - but then say you are not definate - so this is not affirmation rather it is doubt and uncertainty.
They try to use as evidence for this - that the Khabarul-Aahaad amounts only to conjecture (zann) and they quote
They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire, even though there has already come to them guidance from their Lord [Najm 53:23]