Shaikh al-Albaani: "This would be a correct answer if we were in the very first times (of Islaam) before the sects had appeared and spread. But if we were to ask, now, any Muslim from any of these sects with which we differ on account of aqeedah, his answer would not be any different to this word. All of them – the Shi’ite Rafidi, the Khaariji, the Nusayri Alawi – would say, "I am a Muslim". Hence, this is not sufficient in these days.
I wonder why Shaikh Albani did not mention "Ahmadiyah" in the list of sects which he "considers" to be the out of the fold of Islam. He mentions Shi'tes, Kharijites and Alawis only. As for the Kharjites, we are still yet to identify in which forms and levels are they present among Muslims. There is no single identifyable community which declare themselves as Kharjites. The case is different with Shi'tes and Alawis. As you may aware of the fact that Shi'tes and Alawis have a world of differences. Shi'tes are NOT Alawis and Alawis are NOT Shias even though some of them (Alawis) identify them so. My emphasis is on the point that by only considering that if a particular faction doesn't identify itself as "Ahl-e-Sunnah", it does not make it a "non-Muslim" creed.
I would like to give an example here:
"Ahmadiyyah" basically evolved from the Ahl-e-sunnah wal jamaah. If we analyse there beliefs and practices, we come to know that originally Mriza G.A.Qadiyani was a Sunni but then after the proclamation of his so-called prophethood the rubbish he started to preach, it made him a Kaafir, a non-muslim and his creed, as simply non-muslims even though they recite shahadah and Quran and hold similar beliefs in the same manner other Sunni Muslims do.
Now, consider the case of Shi'ites and Alawis. Alawis also evolved from the Shi'ites in the history and founded there own esoteric doctrines which are hidden and burried inside there hearts even today and most of these doctrines are un-known but a few have been exposed. There belief of the Divinity of Ali ibn-e-Abu Talib and incarnation of God in him etc is one of them, which simply makes them out of the fold of Islam and we need little solid evidence from Quran to prove that.
NOW,if someone, when trying to define the Sunni Islam says that Sunnis has two distinct major branches i.e; The main orthodox Sunni branch (divided into different sub-catagories) and the Ahamddiya branch....etc.... I would like to pose a Question,that, how would a Sunni feel knowing the fact that Ahamddiya and their doctrines have nothing to do with the Sunni belief?
In the similar fashion, when trying to define the Shia Islam, if someone says that Shias are of two types. Shia orthodox (sub-divided into different catagories) and the Alawi....etc.....I would again like to pose a question,that, how would a Shia feel when he knows that Alawis and their doctrines have nothing to do with the Shia belief.
Brushing different faction or some self-proclaimed Sunnis or the Shias with the same brush is not just.
Therefore, just to identify the Shia as a non-believer on the basis of some bias and prejudice is certainly creating fitnaa. Though there are differences between the two schools of thought on various issues but none is of the fundamental type or such a one that compels the leaders of the one to label other as a "non-muslim".
Sheikh Ahmed Deedat of South Africa once during his lecture said : If we identify the four schools of thought though there are crucial differences among them on various issues like 200 differences between the Sha'fai and the Hanafi on Salaat only. But by only considering the fact that all are derived from Quran and Sunnah then why can't we accept the the Ja'afri Shia as the fifth which is also derived from the Quran and Sunnah?
In this regard, the fatwa of the Head of renowned Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Shiekh Mahmood Shaltoot is very important in reconciliating the Shia and Sunni schools of thought.
This is a time for unity and calling people towards Islam thorugh Wisdom and beautiful preaching in the true Islamic Brotherhood but all we do is to tend to propagate our very own version of Islam. I would also like to make a point that with regard to the group of scholars and people whose teachings are generally named as "Wahhabis", commonly known as "Deobandi" in the Indian sub-continent (though this group hate to be called 'Wahhabis') are in many ways, on certain small matters, different from that of the other Ahl-e-sunnah (who are commonly known as Barelvis in Indian sub-continent with some other minor factions) So, If someone says that Ahl-e-sunnah has only some differences in some Shara'ii matters (practical laws) and not in the ideological matters,it is not true. (though these ideological matters are not basic)
Here is the fatwa:
1) Islam does not require a Muslim to follow a particular Madh'hab (school of thought). Rather, we say: every Muslim has the right to follow one of the schools of thought which has been correctly narrated and its verdicts have been compiled in its books. And, everyone who is following such Madhahib [schools of thought] can transfer to another school, and there shall be no crime on him for doing so.
2) The Ja'fari school of thought, which is also known as "al-Shia al- Imamiyyah al-Ithna Ashariyyah" (i.e., The Twelver Imami Shi'ites) is a school of thought that is religiously correct to follow in worship as are other Sunni schools of thought.
Muslims must know this, and ought to refrain from unjust prejudice to any particular school of thought, since the religion of Allah and His Divine Law (Shari'ah) was never restricted to a particular school of thought. Their jurists (Mujtahidoon) are accepted by Almighty Allah, and it is permissible to the "non-Mujtahid" to follow them and to accord with their teaching whether in worship (Ibadaat) or transactions (Mu'amilaat).
