to believe—is that sufficient for him?

The scholars of our school differ on this: some consider it sufficient, while others require these beliefs to be affirmed on the basis of proofs.”

[Ibn Taymiyya’s commentary]

I say:

Those among the various groups who make reasoning from evidence obligatory fall into two categories. The first consists of those who say that most ordinary people neglect it. They hold two positions: the extremists among them say that such people’s faith is invalid. Most, however, say that their faith is valid through acceptance on authority, although they are sinful for neglecting reasoning from evidence. This is the position of the majority of them.

Various Hanafī scholars and others have mentioned this. Thus, certain Hanafī scholars stated in their commentary on al-Fiqh al-Akbar:

“Abū Hanīfa, Sufyān, Mālik, al-Awzāʿī, and the general body of jurists and hadith scholars held that the faith of someone who accepts on authority is valid, but that he is sinful for neglecting reasoning from evidence.”

[The words of the commentator on Abū Hanīfa’s al-Fiqh al-Akbar]

The commentator said:

“This yields two points of benefit. The first is that faith based on acceptance on authority is valid, even if a person has not found his way to reasoning from evidence. This is contrary to the Muʿtazilīs and Ashʿarīs, for neither group regards as valid the faith of someone who accepts on authority, or faith based on such acceptance; they hold ordinary people to be unbelievers.”