We may say: Indeed, the Murjeia means today the Ash'aris only, and they are the sunnis in general according to the belief in this time, because there is no one who follows the school of the Mu'tazila in these times.
Before al- Ash'ary, the Murjeia were many sects, and those sets were subdivisions of the Sunnis equivalent to the Shi'a and the Kharijites. But when al- Ash'ry's school of thought appeared, the Murjeia became another title for the Sunnis or for al- Ash'ry's school in general. In (his book) al-Milal and al- Nihal, al- Shahristany said: "And it is said (that) al- Irja' (delaying) (means) the delaying of 'Ali, peace be on him, from the first degree to the fourth (degree)." As you see, this is the thought of the Sunnis in general.
It is not our purpose to research the gathering of these names in the Schools of al- Ash'ary or their departing from, rather our first purpose is to know the situation of al- Murjeia on that day. There is no doubt that the Murjeia in that time were sets and schools. They were gathered together by their opinion that said: it is enough (to show) faith with words even if there is no act, and even if the person who claims belief commits every atrocity still he is a believer and follows the faith of Jibra'il and Mika'il, and they delayed forgiveness for those who commit great sins.
Maybe, they were called the Murjeia for this reason or because Allah has delayed their punishment. (it is derived from the word al- irja' meaning delay) or because they delayed 'Ali, peace be on him, from the first degree to the fourth degree as al- Shahristany has mentioned.
What we have mentioned is the common idea among the groups of the Murjeia. This what the books of the two parties have reported, which has mentioned the meeting of the parties and departing of the religious sects.
Were Abu Hanifa and his fellower from the Masiryya Murjeia,31 who lived in Iraq? Were al- Shafi'y, Malik b. Anas, b. Abu Layla, Shurayk b. Abd Allah, and their fellower from the Murjeia who were called al-Shukkak or al- Batariya, and they were the people of al- Hashu and the great majority who were called al- Hashawiya?
We can not decide this, because the books of the sects are different about that ancestry. Also they did not depend on reliable references that may help us to understand the correct viewpoints. Besides the fanaticism of those authors for their sects and schools made the other sect a goal for them. Moreover, the men of the secular authorities in those times helped this crime to happen, because they propagated a sect and waged war against the other. To achieve this purpose, they hired, orators to preach and for them, so the person who has no knowledge or studies may miss the truth.
Maybe, those books have thrown many writers into snares of confusion. In short, it is not easy for us to depend on those books to understand the correct ancestry. So, the only sect which has correctly related to the Murjeia is al- Jahamyya, who were the followers of Jaham b. Safwan, because they frankly believed in what we have mentioned, and the authors have agreed on that. Also they (the authors) have reported (traditions) from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family, which have cursed them, while we are innocent of their responsibility.
One of these traditions is: "The Murjeia had been cursed by the tongues of seventy prophets. It was said to him: Who are the Murjeia? He said: Those who said: Belief is speech." 32 In summary. There is no doubt who the Murjeia were at that time.
Also they were a group of sects. We have mentioned their thoughts earlier. Their thoughts, which brought them together, was that words are enough to achieve belief even if there is no action to match these words, rather even if the action is contrary to the words. We are in no need to study thoroughly their subdivisions and their characteristics lest we should miss our aim and make mistakes. We ask Allah, the Exalted, to protect us from mistakes.