Ahl al-Ra'y

 (أهل الرأي) refers to an Islamic creedal group advocating for the use of reason for theological decisions and scriptural interpretation. They were one of two main groups debating the source of Islamic creed in the second century of Islam, the other being  (the people of hadith).

Its proponents, which included many early jurists of the Hanafi school, used the term ra'y to refer to "sound" or "considered" reasoning, such as (analogical deduction). Their opponents from the ' creedal group held that the Quran and authentic hadith were the only admissible sources of Islamic law, and objected to any use of ra'y in jurisprudence, whether in the form of ', ' (consideration of public interest), or ' (legal subterfuges). According to Daniel W. Brown,  thought a hadith should "sometimes be subject to other overriding principles" such as the "continuous practice" of the Ummah (Muslim community) and "general principles of equity" which better represented "the spirit" of the Prophet of Islam.

Over time, Hanafi jurists gradually came to accept the primacy of the Quran and hadith advocated by the  creedal group, restricting the use of other forms of legal reasoning to interpretation of these scriptures. In turn, Hanbali jurists, who had led the ' creedal group, gradually came to accept the use of '.