(Original post by mel0n)
Sorry this is so vastly off topic to the other thread that I moved it.
Firstly forgive me if the following is so convoluted and incomprehensible that it induces nausea, but it's 4:27am and I am still awake for some reason. I am likely not to reply to you if not now, as I'm quite forgetful with things like TSR. Apologies in advance for the stupid length. Don't expect to be able to follow it, my eyes are shutting...
So you would reject anything from the Hanbali school on the basis that it is the same as this 'movement', as I don't see where the distinction between Hanbalis and this 'movement' is drawn. The spread of madhabs and how big it is, or how many people follow it, doesn't mean that the adherents to it are somehow more 'rightful' than those of the Hanbali school. I'm not even Hanbali but my point here is that you can't say 'so and so is right because of the madhab'. Though the reason those three schools have probably dominated in terms of scholarship IS because they're bigger, rather than anything else.
Not quite sure what your intention of posting these two particular articles was. I know what a salafi is. I don't really like the term but then I also understand why the term is used today. Though a lot don't call themselves salafis, because there's no need to. I like how you slipped the 'I place my trust in the superior knowledge of scholars' in - seeing as you're very opposed to 'salafis' do you think that they don't?
You're not being
I take it you're referring to the Ashari school as being the 'dominant' school? The aqidah in these schools hasn't always been dominant and history speaks a lot about something more so than the present, so to say that 'today this is taught so and so' doesn't link back to the truth of the matter. They were cursed in the Sunni world by Sunni scholars as well as the Mutazila, while Caliph al-Qadir, as far as I know, banned them from preaching their views and this creed was signed by ***aha of all four schools. But saying this I have no problem with Deobandis so I'm sorry if I made it sound that way!
The aqidah of the four imams of Sunni Islam was the same, I hope you agree - and if we're pretty certain that Imam Ahmad's was contrary to what you claim is taught in 95% of schools today, then by entailment I hope you agree that the other three imams, who were students/teachers of each other, was the same. You could equally say "today 95% of Muslims think X" and so "X must be right" even if X is bad. You can't always equate majority to truth. On one hand you sound quite open minded but on the other you seem like a 'I'm not even gonna read it or accept it cos it has come from Saudi' type, even if it hasn't necessarily come from there.
Out of genuine interest, some examples?
What statistics though? Seriously, substantial numbers are always better than claims. Though I'm glad we agree that it would be blasphemous to use the other term. Also don't understand your last sentence. I'm not trying to prove you wrong in anything, as I'm far from knowledgeable enough to do that and I wouldn't even bother attempting, but I think it's alright to discuss and I guess at least I get to learn too!