Why do we need to break up Tawhid into classifications?

[Jehan99]

As-Salamu Alaikum,
I was listening to this class on the CD and I had one question when he was talking about how Tawhid is broken into 2 or 3 parts (Rubbibiya, Ulohiyaa, Asma wa Siffat). I am still not clear on why we have to do this in the first place. He said that it was easier to teach the people this way. But my question is that why can't you just teach the people Quran and Sunnah? If you want to teach the people about Tawhid why do not just teach them the Quran itself? Is the Quran too complex to understand that we have to break up these categories and teach the people this? Why can't we go straight to the sources?

Jazak Allah Khair.

[IbnMasood]

Walaikumassalam... brother?

Originally Posted by Jehan99

why can't you just teach the people Quran and Sunnah?

It is still the Qur'an and the Sunnah. It is only a categorisation of concepts found in them. I haven't listened to the CD but if you look into books on the topic you will see countless supporting evidence from the Qur'an and the Sunnah for such concepts as Tawhid. Try picking up a copy of Bilal Philips' Fundamentals of Tawhid to go along with CD set. With both inshaAllah you will be Tawhid-ready

It's like seeing the sky. Just by itself, it is the sky. Someone would say... why should you make it so complicated... just look up at it and see it for what it is. But you can divide it up into clouds, stars, moon, sun etc, then break those down into further concepts and describe them in detail. This is the role of the scholar or academic (regardless of what field he/she is in). It makes the sky easier to understand for someone who not as able to (e.g. a blind person who cannot see the sky). Therefore the scholar breaks up Tawhid that is found in the Qur'an and Sunnah into categories to make it easier for the layperson who does not have knowledge to learn and understand.

This is also why it is so important for us laymen to learn knowledge and gain the understanding of our religion from the learned, pious and trustworthy scholars and not to pick out ayaat and hadeeth from the Qur'an and Sunnah and attempt to follow them on our own.

My brother, once you start learning this religion in depth and progress further in learning knowledge the religion feels like a bottomless valley that stretches beyond a distant horizon, it is something that is at once so simple and easy to understand yet also so deep and massive that you feel humbled in both intellect and soul. It gives you a great appreciation and love for the scholars of the past and present who have exerted great efforts to preserve and then teach this knowledge to us.

[Jehan99]

I understand that you are saying that these concepts have been taken from Quran and Sunnah, but why not teach the Quran directly? When the Prophet (saw) taught the Sahabah the Quran in the house of Al-Arqam I am certain that he (saw) never mentioned any of these 3 different types of Tawhid. So why do we need to? Everything that we need to know about Allah (swt) and about our Aqeedah we can learn from the Quran. So why not have an in depth study of the Quran rather than learning about these categories of category.

Also can you tell me who was the first scholar who categorized Tawhid into these 3 parts? I am pretty sure it was never done in the first 3 generations.

The problem is that different scholars say different things. There were many classical scholars who never categorized Tawhid as such, so how do I know which scholars to follow? That is why I think it is better to go back to the source. Allah (swt) knows best and I ask Him (swt) to guide us all.

Jazak Allah Khair.

[AbdArRahman]

I will try to answer that to the best of my abilities.

The Quran unlike most contemporary books requires a different approach.

The sahaabah unlike us were stronger in determination and were not bogged down by the current education system which has influenced us so much that some people even went into misguidance because of that.

Therefore the sahaabah started with a clean slate. We do not.
Hence the scholars instead of expending effort on cleaning the slate and then writing all over, saw what had been written and basically erased some words and added other words to the slate to be able to teach us with less effort going to waste.

Hence they teach us according to contemporary methods and then use evidences from the Quran and Sunnah to support it.

I would agree that people studying tafseer should be taught on how to approach the Quran with what things in mind so that they can derive some benefits(not islamic rulings) on their own instead of relying on tafaasir to restrict their thinking to the benefits derived by the scholars.

I hope that helped clarify things.

Anything good that came from this post is from Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala and any evil that came from this post is from limitations of my own self. So if you understood the concept, praise Allah and if you did not then ask Allah azza wa jal to have mercy upon me.

Salam Alaikum

The same question can be asked regarding breaking Islamic sciences into fiqh, hadith, tafsir. These divisions were not done explicitly by the Prophet salla Allahu alayhi wa sallam Yet all scholars and students of Islam study and teach Islam in the framework of such sciences.

We can go even a step further, and look at any one of these sciences. Fiqh is the perfect example. We don't find the Quran or Sunnah explicitly listing for us the conditions of wudhu, the shurut of wudhu, the sunan of wudhu, the factors that break wudhu, etc. Such 'lists' and divisions are only found in textbooks written centuries later. The Companions never studied nor taught fiqh in this manner.

So: why shouldn't we simply teach as they taught?

Answer: their styles of learning and teaching were suitable for them, but our styles are different. It is not an innovation to re-hash the old in a new format; it is not an innovation to categorize and explain. It would be an innovation to come up with a new understanding that could not be supported by the classical texts.

Hope this helps.

yq